Social Distancing - will ships have to rearrange or even close venues? And who regulates this?

[ducklite]

31 minutes ago, clo said:

I would guess that the process is that they sue, get a judgment and go from there. 

Yep.  

[ducklite]

31 minutes ago, Roz said:

Non profit hospitals have to provide a certain amt. of indigent care, whether you think they're deserving of it or not.  I've never known of a medical practice or hospital that took someone's home or other assets if the person was willing to make even modest payments on a regular basis.  Besides, taking away someone's car or home just guarantees they'll never see the rest of the money, because being homeless or not being able to drive to a job pretty much means a life of poverty for most of us.

 

I didn't know about travel insurance until I was in my late 40s.  Doesn't make me a bad person or immoral, just uninformed. 

 

They have to stabilize the patient and then they can discharge them.  And the term "stabilize" can be used very subjectively.  

When a person refuses to pay a reasonable amount towards a hospital bill, there's no reason not to seize their assets.  Something is better than nothing.  There was just a new story about a hospital seizing assets because people were not willing to pay.  When I needed an MRI a few years back I offered to pay $300 a month (hadn't yet met the deductible for the year) and they gladly accepted that for four months.  It was a reasonable offer.  Had I offered $10 a month they would have told me to pay it in full or get sued.

I'm not sure how you weren't aware of travel insurance.  The travel agents, airlines, cruise companies, AAA, and credit cards have been hawking it for over 25 years.

Edited May 14, 2020 by ducklite

[navybankerteacher]

2 hours ago, ducklite said:

One is enforceable, the other is an act of God.

For something to be “enforceable” it has to be enacted — and who do you think would enact it?  As I posted, I seriously doubt Congress (or any state legislature) would pass a law barring people from cruising without either sufficient assets or insurance to cover possible eventualities - and I do not think the mass market cruise lines would want to so write off a major part of their market.

 

Who do you think would make such an “enforceable” rule?

[Roz]

1 hour ago, ducklite said:

I'm not sure how you weren't aware of travel insurance.  The travel agents, airlines, cruise companies, AAA, and credit cards have been hawking it for over 25 years.

 

Guess I'm just an idiot or stuck on stupid.  I took my first cruise in 2001, and the travel agent offered and recommended the cruise line's insurance.  Probably didn't measure up to your standards, but I suppose it was better than nothing.  Other than a trip to Europe in the mid 80s with my college alumni association, my travel was all domestic.  If anyone was hawking insurance for my airline tickets or other prepaid expenses, I don't remember it, or I didn't understand what was being offered.

[ducklite]

27 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

For something to be “enforceable” it has to be enacted — and who do you think would enact it?  As I posted, I seriously doubt Congress (or any state legislature) would pass a law barring people from cruising without either sufficient assets or insurance to cover possible eventualities - and I do not think the mass market cruise lines would want to so write off a major part of their market.

 

Who do you think would make such an “enforceable” rule?

I would imagine various Senators with close ties to the medical community will begin to hear the suggestion from various hospitals and doctors and it could easily get slipped into a bill.  It's not like the insurance lobby would be against it.

[ducklite]

6 minutes ago, Roz said:

 

Guess I'm just an idiot or stuck on stupid.  I took my first cruise in 2001, and the travel agent offered and recommended the cruise line's insurance.  Probably didn't measure up to your standards, but I suppose it was better than nothing.  Other than a trip to Europe in the mid 80s with my college alumni association, my travel was all domestic.  If anyone was hawking insurance for my airline tickets or other prepaid expenses, I don't remember it, or I didn't understand what was being offered.

I don't expect people to take travel insurance for a domestic trip.  That said, I think people should be responsible enough to have health insurance to begin with.  I don't insure for domestic travel, I've got car insurance that covers rentals, a good travel benefit credit card (actually a few of them, but the Sapphire Reserve has been my card of choice for the past year or so), and BCBS PPO that's accepted pretty much everywhere.  

My niece tagged along with us to the UK for five days and I still made her spend the $30 for the travel insurance policy, because "life comes at you fast."

Cruise line insurance is fine as long as the limits are high enough and people understand it covers only from the time you get on the ship until you get off--it doesn't cover travel and pre/post cruise days.

Edited May 14, 2020 by ducklite

[Roz]

Just now, ducklite said:

I don't expect people to take travel insurance for a domestic trip.  That said, I think people should be responsible enough to have health insurance to begin with.  I don't insure for domestic travel, I've got car insurance that covers rentals, a good travel benefit credit card (actually a few of them, but the Sapphire Reserve has been my card of choice for the past year or so), and BCBS PPO that's accepted pretty much everywhere.  

My niece tagged along with us to the UK for five days and I still made her spend the $30 for the travel insurance policy, because "life comes at you fast."

 

Not everyone has your resources.  I'm happy for you.  But based on your requirements, travel would be a luxury only reserved for the well off.  

 

My 63 yr. old sister could no longer afford her $1,400 a month health insurance premium, and had to drop it.  Instead, she puts what she can in a savings acct. and is holding her breath until she qualifies for Medicare.  She pays cash when she goes to the doctor or has to have a test of some type such as a mammogram.  When she had to have a biopsy, she made a down payment and then worked out a payment plan ahead of the procedure.  Unfortunately this is the reality for many older people here in the US.  People are just trying to do the best they can.  

[clo]

2 hours ago, Roz said:

 

Not everyone has your resources.  I'm happy for you.  But based on your requirements, travel would be a luxury only reserved for the well off.  

 

My 63 yr. old sister could no longer afford her $1,400 a month health insurance premium, and had to drop it.  Instead, she puts what she can in a savings acct. and is holding her breath until she qualifies for Medicare.  She pays cash when she goes to the doctor or has to have a test of some type such as a mammogram.  When she had to have a biopsy, she made a down payment and then worked out a payment plan ahead of the procedure.  Unfortunately this is the reality for many older people here in the US.  People are just trying to do the best they can.  

I'm sorry about your sister's financial problems but I know you must be so proud of her. And I bet SHE doesn't go on probably any vacations. I wish her well in all ways.

 

[navybankerteacher]

2 hours ago, ducklite said:

I would imagine various Senators with close ties to the medical community will begin to hear the suggestion from various hospitals and doctors and it could easily get slipped into a bill.  It's not like the insurance lobby would be against it.

At this point there are far more Representatives (since the Dems. took the House- and most likely will take the Senate in November) and Senators who would rather see the tax payers cover individuals rather than requiring individuals to cover themselves for medical costs.  There are going to be a lot of unexpected, tangential side effects from this COVID 19 thing than just how cruising gets impacted.

 

Get ready for the new world.

 

[ducklite]

35 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

At this point there are far more Representatives (since the Dems. took the House- and most likely will take the Senate in November) and Senators who would rather see the tax payers cover individuals rather than requiring individuals to cover themselves for medical costs.  There are going to be a lot of unexpected, tangential side effects from this COVID 19 thing than just how cruising gets impacted.

 

Get ready for the new world.

 

I don’t disagree and am in favor of socialized medicine as long as there is the availability of private as well. (Like NHS in the UK). 
 

I do think that anyone who enters the US or it’s waters should be required to have some form of health and repatriation insurance, just like many countries require of US citizens. 

[ducklite]

3 hours ago, Roz said:

 

Not everyone has your resources.  I'm happy for you.  But based on your requirements, travel would be a luxury only reserved for the well off.  

 

My 63 yr. old sister could no longer afford her $1,400 a month health insurance premium, and had to drop it.  Instead, she puts what she can in a savings acct. and is holding her breath until she qualifies for Medicare.  She pays cash when she goes to the doctor or has to have a test of some type such as a mammogram.  When she had to have a biopsy, she made a down payment and then worked out a payment plan ahead of the procedure.  Unfortunately this is the reality for many older people here in the US.  People are just trying to do the best they can.  

She’s not out spending money on cruises though. Big difference. 

[ilikeanswers]

While I do think it is silly to travel without insurance I also think any place that devotes a huge portion of their economy to tourism should have provisions for medical treatment for the uninsured. Unless the country puts as an entry requirement that all visitors will have adequate insurance if that same country is then going to advertise and encourage people to come visit them then the country should be prepared for uninsured visitors and have some system in place for them otherwise shut down your tourism sector if it such a big problem that the benefits are outweighing the cost.

[ldubs]

18 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

You might turn down a TA insurance doesn't mean you haven't purchased from somewhere else. If they are making customers sign a disclamer it must be for their own company records, maybe to prove the TA's attempted sale🤔?

 

People will say they were sure insurance was included.  The disclaimer, or whatever it is called, provides proof that the customer knew full well.   

[ldubs]

1 hour ago, ilikeanswers said:

While I do think it is silly to travel without insurance I also think any place that devotes a huge portion of their economy to tourism should have provisions for medical treatment for the uninsured. Unless the country puts as an entry requirement that all visitors will have adequate insurance if that same country is then going to advertise and encourage people to come visit them then the country should be prepared for uninsured visitors and have some system in place for them otherwise shut down your tourism sector if it such a big problem that the benefits are outweighing the cost.

 

Hmm, I'm not sure I would agree with you on this.  People need to be responsible for themselves.  I'm also not sure how much of a problem this really is for the country being visited as it is for some people who encounter large unanticipated expenses due to illness while traveling.   I can understand a requirement for a financial responsibility test, which for all essential purposes would be an insurance policy.  To me the bottom line is is someone shouldn't expect a handout when they do something they can't afford to do.   That would include being responsible for risk of needing medical attention while traveling.  

[ldubs]

4 hours ago, ducklite said:

I don’t disagree and am in favor of socialized medicine as long as there is the availability of private as well. (Like NHS in the UK). 
 

I do think that anyone who enters the US or it’s waters should be required to have some form of health and repatriation insurance, just like many countries require of US citizens. 

 

To me there is a difference between socialized medicine and socialized insurance.  People (politicians) talk a lot about medical care.  What they are mostly referring to is free or low cost insurance.  I think it is the wrong approach.  I agree it is the easier approach.   So, I guess what I'm really saying is, though I shudder at the thought of gov't inefficiencies,  I would probably be in favor of socialized medicine too.   

[KnowTheScore]

10 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

As I posted, I seriously doubt Congress (or any state legislature) would pass a law barring people from cruising without either sufficient assets or insurance to cover possible eventualities - and I do not think the mass market cruise lines would want to so write off a major part of their market.

 

Who do you think would make such an “enforceable” rule?

 

Maybe things are different in the USA but here in the UK, with Carnival's P&O Cruise Line, it is a term of your contract with P&O that you have travel insurance and to a very significant degree too.   From their documents:

 

"INSURANCE

 

32. It is a condition of the Contract that every Guest must have full and valid medical insurance which includes cover for pre-existing medical conditions worldwide, or as a minimum, in the countries that the Guest is due to visit and which must remain in force for the entire duration of the Package. The insurance policy must, as a minimum, include medical and repatriation coverage for not less than £2 million and must include cover for the cost of emergency evacuations from the ship, including but not limited to, evacuations by helicopter. "

 

 

I'd hazard a guess that some P&O passengers were unaware of this "small print" in their contract and that their insurance doesn't cover £2 million.

 

.

 

[ilikeanswers]

3 hours ago, ldubs said:

Hmm, I'm not sure I would agree with you on this.  People need to be responsible for themselves.  I'm also not sure how much of a problem this really is for the country being visited as it is for some people who encounter large unanticipated expenses due to illness while traveling.   I can understand a requirement for a financial responsibility test, which for all essential purposes would be an insurance policy.  To me the bottom line is is someone shouldn't expect a handout when they do something they can't afford to do.   That would include being responsible for risk of needing medical attention while traveling.  

 

The way I see it is if you want to make money from tourism you have to accept the bad with the good. They want to make money from visitors, they do everything they can to entice these visitors (and especially with things like afterpay they are really going after low income people these days) and the reality is not everyone will be insured or insured to the full hilt especially if no one is regulating it so when something goes wrong I think just washing your hands off them is a little unethical.

[navybankerteacher]

2 hours ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

Maybe things are different in the USA but here in the UK, with Carnival's P&O Cruise Line, it is a term of your contract with P&O that you have travel insurance and to a very significant degree too.   From their documents:

 

"INSURANCE

 

32. It is a condition of the Contract that every Guest must have full and valid medical insurance which includes cover for pre-existing medical conditions worldwide, or as a minimum, in the countries that the Guest is due to visit and which must remain in force for the entire duration of the Package. The insurance policy must, as a minimum, include medical and repatriation coverage for not less than £2 million and must include cover for the cost of emergency evacuations from the ship, including but not limited to, evacuations by helicopter. "

 

 

I'd hazard a guess that some P&O passengers were unaware of this "small print" in their contract and that their insurance doesn't cover £2 million.

 

.

 

If anything like this were required for US departures, I would imagine that Carnival, RCI, and NCL would have a very hard time filling their ships. Folks who “can’t afford” passports, are not likely to want to buy that sort of coverage.

[cruisemom42]

3 hours ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

Maybe things are different in the USA but here in the UK, with Carnival's P&O Cruise Line, it is a term of your contract with P&O that you have travel insurance and to a very significant degree too.   From their documents:

 

"INSURANCE

 

32. It is a condition of the Contract that every Guest must have full and valid medical insurance which includes cover for pre-existing medical conditions worldwide, or as a minimum, in the countries that the Guest is due to visit and which must remain in force for the entire duration of the Package. The insurance policy must, as a minimum, include medical and repatriation coverage for not less than £2 million and must include cover for the cost of emergency evacuations from the ship, including but not limited to, evacuations by helicopter. "

 

 

I'd hazard a guess that some P&O passengers were unaware of this "small print" in their contract and that their insurance doesn't cover £2 million.

 

.

 

 

I have run into the same thing when I've booked UK tours with specialized outfits. They require proof of insurance.  I've often wondered why cruise lines don't do the same...

 

[ilikeanswers]

31 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

If anything like this were required for US departures, I would imagine that Carnival, RCI, and NCL would have a very hard time filling their ships. Folks who “can’t afford” passports, are not likely to want to buy that sort of coverage.

 

If those companies need uninsured customers to keep them afloat, then the least they can do is foot the bill when things go wrong😆.

[ilikeanswers]

3 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

I have run into the same thing when I've booked UK tours with specialized outfits. They require proof of insurance.  I've often wondered why cruise lines don't do the same...

 

When I booked Aranui they wanted proof of insurance, however it is the only time I have encountered that request🤔.

[ducklite]

2 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

The way I see it is if you want to make money from tourism you have to accept the bad with the good. They want to make money from visitors, they do everything they can to entice these visitors (and especially with things like afterpay they are really going after low income people these days) and the reality is not everyone will be insured or insured to the full hilt especially if no one is regulating it so when something goes wrong I think just washing your hands off them is a little unethical.

I disagree.  To me the ethics test is on the visitor, not the host.  If I go to your home and have a heart attack, should you pay my hospital bill?  Of course not.

[ducklite]

1 hour ago, navybankerteacher said:

If anything like this were required for US departures, I would imagine that Carnival, RCI, and NCL would have a very hard time filling their ships. Folks who “can’t afford” passports, are not likely to want to buy that sort of coverage.

That would be the mainstreams issue to figure out.  I'm not saying that people need over two million Dollars/Pounds/Euros/Rough Equivalent, but they should have something with at least $250K or so worth of medical insurance plus repatriation.  If they can't afford the insurance, they can't afford the vacation.  

[ilikeanswers]

43 minutes ago, ducklite said:

I disagree.  To me the ethics test is on the visitor, not the host.  If I go to your home and have a heart attack, should you pay my hospital bill?  Of course not.

 

But I am not making a comercial profit off your visit. These countries aren't encouraging us to visit out of the kindness of their heart, they want to make money out of our visit and if they like cruise lines wish to profit of uninsured travellers then they should accept the consequences of what happens when that goes wrong.

Edited May 15, 2020 by ilikeanswers

[ducklite]

27 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

But I am not making a comercial profit off your visit. These countries aren't encouraging us to visit out of the kindness of their heart, they want to make money out of our visit and if they like cruise lines wish to profit of uninsured travellers then they should accept the consequences of what happens when that goes wrong.

So you would be happy with tens of thousands of uninsured people visiting Australia each year, and the potential of having numerous critically ill and uninsured people filling your ICU's?  I have a feeling that your NHS wouldn't agree with you.