Car Insurance vs. Health Insurance

I’m painfully tired of this argument, so I thought I would explain it here, really slowly, in case you’re still confused.

The argument that I keep hearing from the bootstrappers, in voices dripping with such scorn that it seems like they actually believe it’s logical, is that the comparison between car and health insurance is invalid because you aren’t required to have car insurance if you don’t have a car–but, if the current biil passes, you will be required to have health care or face a fine.

Here’s the reason the comparison is valid: every driver is required to have coverage. If you don’t own a car, but you borrow one, the owner’s insurance better cover any accidents you have. If not, you’ll be in trouble. So yes, you do have to have coverage even if you don’t own a car–just like a minor is required to have health insurance, but her guardians are required to pay for it. This is so that if another driver damages my car, I’m not out the money.

“But what about those people who never drive,” you ask, sure that you’ve finally bested the liberal who’s watching in sympathy as you writhe in misguided glee. You’re absolutely right. People who never drive or ride in automobiles, do not need a single bit of car insurance. So if you can provide absolute, 100% positive, cannot fail proof that you will never get a disease, injury, or ailment that will require treatment or spread to others, I’m pretty confident you can get out of having health insurance.

Do you get it now? Probably not, because you were distracted by Rush’s big head (oooh, shiny!) halfway through. But I feel better.

*************************************

Just so you know, I’m not fond of the current bill. While I think people should have health care, I don’t believe this bill does enough to provide it to the ones who need it, and is too hard on the people for whom it neglects to provide. But that doesn’t make the car/health comparison any less valid.

If you agree, feel free to comment. If you disagree, feel free to comment. I love discussion. But follow my rules, or I’ll block you. It’s my blog, and it’s a dictatorship, not a democracy.

I Don’t Care Who You Are…

That’s just funny.

Just a Quickie

I found this through a LiveJournal friend. It says to post this in an email, but most people I email would have a coronary, so I’m posting it here instead:

Dear friend,

After a lot of years of devastating setbacks in the fight for marriage equality, it seems like we’re finally moving in the right direction. With marriage legal in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and Maine, and the fights going strong in New Hampshire, New York and California, this movement is gaining more momentum every day, and I’m excited to be a part of it.

To that end, I wanted to let you know that CREDO Action is giving away some awesome stickers about supporting gay marriage – I think you’d really like them. I just got mine – if you have a minute, click this link to check out the stickers and get one of your own (for free!).

CREDO Action

Thanks!

George C. Joseph and Other Things

By now, I’m sure  you’ve seen the letter from Mr. Joseph talking about how his dealership will be taken away. I don’t know the circumstances and will not claim that I do. What I will say is that I work for a family-owned car dealership as well, one that has about twice the number of employees and around four times the inventory. It’s not an entirely fair comparison since they sell foreign cars, but I’ve done some asking around and it turns out that what allegedly happened to Mr. Joseph couldn’t happen to my dealership, because the owner was a little more savvy with the contracts he signed. I also found this post on Craigslist, which while I definitely don’t agree with everything in it, I still find highly amusing:

link

Dear Mr. Joseph.

Congratulations on the success you and your family have enjoyed over the last 35 years.

As you know our free market oriented capitalist system is based on a few fundamental principles. Some of these are:
1. Individual risk and reward
2. Personal responsibility
3. Market selection of winners and losers
4. Rule of law and integrity of contracts

Part of what makes our system so great, is that it enables hardworking citizens, like yourself to achieve great success, as you have. Another part of what makes our system so great, is that it disciplines, through failure, those who will not adapt to new realities, and those who refuse to prepare themselves for all contingencies that life might throw their way.

I applaud you for accepting the first part of the above, but question why you don’t appreciate the second. Your family risked much over the last 35 years. For a large portion of that time, you succeeded. Now you have failed. Did you write a letter to the editor when you succeeded saying “how in America could I be so successful?” Of course not.

During the time you were succeeding, millions of Americans took large gambles and started small businesses. In many case they lost everything – and had to start over… perhaps even working as a salesman or mechanic in your shop. Did you then question the system which had not treated them as kindly as you? Did you then express your outrage that they did not succeed – as you had? Of course not.

You claim that you will lose everything through “NO FAULT OF OUR OWN”. Is that true?

Why did you not see an upcoming recession? Why did you not save money more prudently – in the event of a downturn? Why did not diversify into other brands? Why did you not demand some guarantee from Chrysler when they demanded you remodel your store?

You had a continuing relationship with Chrysler of your own choice, they did not turn out to be the best partner… That happens, and will continue to happen in our system. Next time, you and/or your offspring will remember a simple lesson: “chose your partners carefully”.

Chrysler failed. That is unfortunate, but due to many structural problems with their business model. Don’t despair! American’s will continue to need cars, and new, smarter, more nimble competitors will fill that need. Perhaps you can start again selling their cars, or working for someone who sells their cars. Yes, you might not be boss anymore, and yes, you might not have the prestige that comes with employing 50 people.

However, none of that is your right, and nobody else owes that to you.

Your only right, is to rise and fall as the forces of fortune and your personal enterprise allow. Nothing more. Our rule of law dictates that under bankruptcy all contracts are renegotiable. Perhaps before starting your next venture you brush up your understanding of our legal system. All contracts are subject to review and summary cancellation by the presiding judge in the event that a counterparty goes into bankruptcy. Bankruptcy was, unfortunately necessary for Chrysler to prune you and other underperforming dealerships because state car dealership laws frequently make it impossible for a car manufacturer to cut dealerships without bankruptcy (I’m quite confident you did not fight these laws.)

My advice: Keep your chin up. Maintain your principles. Believe in hard work. Stop crying like a child who has lost at checkers.

Most sincere regards,
Uncle Sam

I would also love to know if his income decreased any in order to try to avoid firing the 20 people he did. He’s certainly not obligated to do that, but if he didn’t, then he needn’t ask that the government be concerned for their plight, either.

***********************

Nancy Pelosi, I wish you would just once think before you speak. You’d think after the first time you got caught in a lie you’d learn, but for such an intelligent woman, this lesson seems to remain beyond you. You’re making a ridiculous spectacle of yourself, and you need to knock that shit off.

***********************

Prince’s latest website: lotusflow3r.com Go there. He is the ultimate and timeless badass–even if I don’t have $77 to join his fanclub.

And I Mean This In The Most Non-Creepy Way Possible…

Ted Danson is married to Mary Steenburgen. Mary Steenburgen is from Newport, Arkansas. Ted and Mary have a home here. If I ever see Ted Danson, I’ll probably have to jump him.

Just letting people know.

Torch

Since I first heard Alanis’ song Torch, I’ve wondered how she could sing it live without crying, since I can’t even sing it in my car without crying. After watching a few YouTube videos, I’ve decided she can’t; she just has more control than I do. Here are the lyrics, if you’re interested. And for the record, I think Ryan Reynolds is a moron.

Torch

I miss your smell and your style
And your pure abiding way
Miss your approach to life
And your body in my bed
Miss your take on anything
And the music you would play
Miss cracking up and wrestling
And our debriefs at end of day

These are things that I miss
These are not times for the weak of heart
These are the days of raw despondence
I never dreamed I would have to lay down
My torch for you like this

I miss your neck and your gait
And your sharing what you write
Miss you walking through the front door
Documentaries in your hand
Miss traveling our traveling
And your fun and charming friends
Miss our Big Sur getaways
And to watch you love my dogs

These are things that I miss
These are not times for the weak of heart
These are the days of raw despondence
I never dreamed I would have to lay down
My torch for you like this

One step one prayer
I soldier on, simulating moving on

I miss your warmth
And the thought of us bringing up our kids
And the part of you that walks
With your stick-tied handkerchief

These are things that I miss
These are not times for the weak of heart
These are the days of raw despondence
I never dreamed I would have to lay down
My torch for you like this

These are things that I miss
These are not times for the weak of heart
These are the days of raw despondence
I never dreamed I would have to lay down
My torch for you like this

Bored

I get insanely bored at work, so I thought I’d post this in case anyone else got bored throughout the day and wanted to chat.

MSN: aglowingmind@hotmail.com

Yahoo!: mightylittleme

AIM: amightylittleme

Google Talk: justthisgirl@gmail.com

Oh, and a gratuitous product plug: if you want to be able to see all your IM networks at once, try Meebo. It’s completely web-based, so you don’t have to download anything, and you can use it for Yahoo!, MSN, AIM, ICQ, Google Talk, Jabber, and Flixter (whatever that is). Pretty sweet.

But yeah. I get bored at work. Chat with me sometime.

Love at First Sight

Amy Alkon sums up perfectly my views on love at first sight.

When I hear couples brag, “We just knew from the moment we saw each other!” I’m amazed that they think this is romantic, and not an announcement that they’re idiots. I always want to ask, “What, exactly, did you know? That she’s reasonably tall, attractive in a sort of bookish way, and you wanted to have sex with her?” What’s actually romantic isn’t committing to somebody because you see how lovable, sexy, and charming they can be, but because you find out how annoying, insufferable, and lacking in some basic table manner they are, and it’s still not enough to chase you away.

It comes from her latest column: http://www.creators.com/lifestylefeatures/advice-goddess-amy-alkon.html

Work, Life, Etc.

My wages were lowered and my hours were decreased. They’ve also decided that we must all dress “professionally” when they had us dress “casually” before. Working there for three years means that I have nothing but casual clothes, since I have no reason to be dressy elsewhere in my life. So I get a lower wage, fewer hours–and am expected to buy a new wardrobe.

I applied for a part-time job today, but then when I thought about it, I decided that was stupid. I mean, liberals don’t work hard. We’re lazy through and through, supported by the government. Ah, well. I’ll probably work two jobs anyway. I always was a slow learner.

Every Cloud Has a Silver Lining

Who would have thought that this horrible work environment would have a positive side–but it does! I haven’t kept a single bite of food inside me for longer than an hour in the past week. In six days, I’ve lost 14 pounds! My pants are loose! I’ve never lost so much weight so fast.

In other good news–which I totally missed until this weekend–there was a mental health parity bill attached to the bailout bill. The previous mental health care parity act said that insurance companies couldn’t put a lower cap on money spent for mental health care than the cap they had on physical health care. Insurance companies got around this by keeping the spending caps the same, but limiting the amount of visits one can use for mental health treatment, both inpatient and outpatient. The new law closes that loophole, stating that the limits must be the same. Some interesting facts about the new law:

• Researchers have found biological causes and effective treatments for numerous mental illnesses.
• A number of companies now specialize in managing mental health benefits, making the costs to insurers and employers more affordable. The law allows these companies to continue managing benefits.
• Employers have found that productivity tends to increase after workers are treated for mental illnesses and drug or alcohol dependence. Such treatments can reduce the number of lost work days.
• The stigma of mental illness may have faded as people see members of the armed forces returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with serious mental problems.
• Parity has proved workable when tried at the state level and in the health insurance program for federal employees, including members of Congress.
• The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the new requirement will increase premiums by an average of about two-tenths of 1 percent. (FYI, this means that my premiums will be raised by approximately six cents. Assuming I’ve done the math correctly, of course–which is a BIG assumption. Hm. Now I’m getting 30 cents. Either way, it’s not enough to consider.)

My concerns are twofold. One is that it doesn’t take effect until 2010. If we can get a bailout done with lightning speed, there’s no reason not to get this on the ball as well, especially since we’ve waited so fucking long for it. My other concern is that insurers will simply put a cap on treatments they haven’t capped before, and then we’ll still be screwed with mental health, with the added bonus of being screwed for physical health.

There is, of course, the argument that an insurance provider is a business and can cover what they want–and if you don’t like it, you can get insurance elsewhere. My first response to that is that it’s simply unfair for a person to have to pay so much more out of pocket because their illness happens to be of a highly experienced nature that, for whatever reason (likely “because we can”), the insurance companies have chosen not to cover. Additionally, since the law only applies to group health insurance provide by employers of 50 or more, many people still simply won’t be accepted for coverage if they have mental health problems, whether they’re willing/able to pay more or not. This argument won’t fly, though, because the sort of people who argue against parity are the people who have never been touched directly by the expense of mental health care and really don’t have the foresight to see that this will benefit them a lot more than it will hurt them.

I recently read an article about women’s health care parity. Apparently women are charged more than men for the same coverage when purchasing private insurance.

In general, insurers say, they charge women more than men of the same age because claims experience shows that women use more health care services. They are more likely to visit doctors, to get regular checkups, to take prescription medications and to have certain chronic illnesses.

So what they’re basically saying is that, since women practice preventative care and are statistically more likely to get certain diseases, their coverage can be up to 50% higher. African Americans, for example, are also statistically more likely to get certain illnesses, yet it is illegal to charge more base on race–as it should be. But the same should hold true for women. This is especially true when you take into account that preventative care costs insurance companies less than treating illnesses not caught by preventative care. (Incidentally, this is also why I never have understood why insurance companies won’t cover birth control, but will cover prenatal care and Viagra; and why they won’t cover smoking cessation drugs/classes, but will cover chronic bronchitis, lung cancer, emphysema, etc.; and why they won’t cover nutritional counseling, but they’ll cover a wide variety of illnesses caused by poor nutrition and obesity.) If the argument is money, then shouldn’t they cover the much less expensive preventative care?

Mental Health Parity Resource: NY Times: Bailout Provides More Mental Health Coverage
Women’ Health Care Resource: NY Times: Women Buying Health Policies Pay a Penalty