Health Insurance Discussion

[IBroke]

Those who already have coverage and OBJECT the public option should also keep in mind that they are also paying for the currently uninsured. That's a fact....so before arguing about "socialized medicine" (IMO, better than nothing), it's certainly worth thinking about that.

[TooMuchCredit]

I've been watching some of the news on this Healthcare Bill (HB) that is in the Senate. Max Baucus, the chairman of the committee, says that the States will have to pay part of the costs, no including the Federal $900B over 10 years. While he says the Fed has the largest portion... the fact that he's saying that the States will be burdened, gives me pause.

What I derive from this, is that States, which are already in deep financial crisis, will now have to fund this Plan as well. Please someone, where does everyone think this money that the individual State's are responsible for, s coming from? I'll give you one guess... and the answer is not "from God himself".

They absolutely have to reduce costs. We already pay 50% more per capita than other countries that insure everyone. Seems at a minimum we should be able to cover everyone at that 50% level and ideally would get that 50% more down some.

Some of the increase in gov't spending though I don't think is telling the whole story. Some of those costs would be shifted from somewhere else. I.E. the public option would add gov't spending, but it would also have some new income coming in from premiums. And the indigent care paid by cites/counties should be reduced. There should also be fewer people having to go bankrupt due to medical bills. So while the gov't would spend more on health care, there would be areas it would spend less.

[momisery]

Maybe if we were not paying for the defense of the rest of the free world it would help? Our military strength is not just for our nation alone. Perhaps it is time other nations chip in on a stronger military if they want to use it? That would help some. Rolling back the tax cuts from Bush would help, I can afford to give up my 30.00 savings. And if we have healthcare thru a single payer like medicare, I would be willing to pay for it, why not... I pay now and still have to pay at the hospital door big bucks. The problem is greed, and it is way beyond the little guy making 500,000.00 per year... this is real greed.

The government is doing a better job with highways, library's, bridges, healthcare, pensions and ss than the corporate brains in America are doing for their own employees unless your one of the chosen few at the top. Big corporate America is what just took us down due to their greed. And they want to blame it on goverment? Really??? It was governments fault for de-regulating them and letting them be so crooked? Shouldn't they simply be honest to begin with so we don't have to pay for all the jails, and attorney's to protect the consumers? If they are doing just a bang up job in the private sector how come so many are being sued over fraud and corrpution? Without government you have no rules, no laws and I can stop by and steal all your posessions when your to old to frend for yourself.

Maybe people are like the guy I met in GA who is against all the hand outs, except for the one that was giving him a break for his sick child? People like all the things that help them, but feel like everyone else should stand on their own?

[JRScott]

I've been watching some of the news on this Healthcare Bill (HB) that is in the Senate. Max Baucus, the chairman of the committee, says that the States will have to pay part of the costs, no including the Federal $900B over 10 years. While he says the Fed has the largest portion... the fact that he's saying that the States will be burdened, gives me pause.

What I derive from this, is that States, which are already in deep financial crisis, will now have to fund this Plan as well. Please someone, where does everyone think this money that the individual State's are responsible for, s coming from? I'll give you one guess... and the answer is not "from God himself".

Now you just hit on why the States are broke. It is underfunded and unfunded federal mandates. I actually asked my State Senator why we were so short this year and he told me it was unfunded and underfunded federal mandates.

See that's how the Federal Government lies to you, see they also shift part of the burden of SCHIP, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc to the states. In fact they only partially fund any mandate they make. That makes it so they only raise taxes a little while your state has to either cut services or raise taxes more....so that your more mad at your state officials than the federal ones.

In the political discussion thread I posted a link to Prof Randy Barnett's draft of the Bill of Federalism. It would specifically forbid underfunded and unfunded mandates, as well as put forth term limits, line item veto, establish that treaties cannot circumvent the Constitution to give the Federal government more power, that the State's can override any federal law upon agreement (I think its 2/3rd or 3/4s have to void the law for it to be voided), establishes that the Federal government has no power to regulate trade that remains wholly within one state as was the original intent, repeals the 16th amendment in favor of a 'fair tax' in the form of a consumption tax. You might like it and see if you can get it introduced into your State's legislation. Lot of very common sense stuff and also some comments from Prof Barnett (He teaches Law at Georgetown University).

[justbroke]

I've been watching some of the news on this Healthcare Bill (HB) that is in the Senate. Max Baucus, the chairman of the committee, says that the States will have to pay part of the costs, no including the Federal $900B over 10 years. While he says the Fed has the largest portion... the fact that he's saying that the States will be burdened, gives me pause.

What I derive from this, is that States, which are already in deep financial crisis, will now have to fund this Plan as well. Please someone, where does everyone think this money that the individual State's are responsible for, s coming from? I'll give you one guess... and the answer is not "from God himself".

[IBroke]

Minor correction...(for some reason I don't have the ability to edit my posts sometimes - maybe there's a time limit or something)

I corrected my quote accordingly..

[TooMuchCredit]

Insurance companies aren't going to voluntarily cover people with pre-existing conditions. They aren't going to remove caps. It has to be put into law that they can do that.

Minor correction...(for some reason I don't have the ability to edit my posts sometimes - maybe there's a time limit or something)

Another step I think if we go a non-gov't route is either make the insurance companies go non-profit OR limit their profit like we do the utility companies...atleast in Georgia, Georgia Power is only allowed a certain amount of profit, otherwise the excess I think has to be refunded to the rate payers. Profits aren't bad and everyone deserves a fair wage for what they do, but excessive profits from someone who is ill is kind of immoral to me.

Another thing that would be nice too... You never have to pay upfront even if you have a copay. Let them give you a bill and you have 30 days or so to pay. Sometimes even those $15, $20 copays can be hard to scrounge up for someone who is just getting by paycheck to paycheck.

[IBroke]

Insurance companies aren't going to voluntarily cover people with pre-existing conditions. They aren't going to remove caps. It has to be put into law that they can do that.

Bingo! It they would, there would be a few million less that are uninsured..

[IBroke]

Why the government? Why can't we establish a TRUE market based system where you can shop for whatever coverage you desire?

The problem you describe is caused by government intervention today. The states dictate what each insurer must cover. The insurers do as they are told.

Appears to me that some States do a lousy job then.

The government isn't my first choice either, but I highly doubt that "we" - the insured - can tell the insurance companies what they have to do. I DON'T want to have insurance companies RUN by the government - however, I don't have a problem with the government defining some basic rules. That doesn't make a true maked based system impossible since EVERY company has to meet those rules. Consider this intervention as "consumer protection".

Why should an insurance simply give up the luxury to collect premiums AND having the option to drop you once it's time for a pay-back? Like a car-insurance that's not supposed to cover accidents...

[hereforinfo]

I suspect folks like your acquaintances are in for a real shock if O'bama's pledge last night to FORCE them to buy insurance comes to fruition. They might have to either give up the boat, get a job or go on disability.

I kind of like the idea of forcing people to get insurance, other than in cases of extreme hardship. But allow anyone to opt out, only if they sign a waiver saying that if they ever seek medical care the debt can never be discharged in bankruptcy. Or else allow them to purchase some cheap coverage that only steps in for major medical emergency. Because at some point, even if someone is against modern medicine, there's always the chance of falling off a ladder and breaking every bone in your body or getting some terminal disease that herbs are not going to cure.

[TooMuchCredit]

I concur. My State has an Office of Insurance Regulation. I wonder what they do all day. They don't seem to be helping me, and yet, it's in their charter to regulate insurance.

They can only regulate as far as what has been defined to be covered. They can only enforce the laws that are in place.

Insurance companies aren't going to voluntarily cover people with pre-existing conditions. They are going to remove caps. It has to be put into law that they can do that.

If they violate the restrictions or refuse to pay certain claims, that's where the regulator comes into play. They are also supposed to handle the opposite direction - insurance fraud where people file bogus claims.

A company exists for one purpose only and that is to make money. It has to be profitable to stay afloat. Theyll do many things to maximize profit. If it's cheaper to dump the toxic byproduct of their manufacturing in the nearby creek, you can't rely on the company to not dump it if there is not a law saying they cannot. You have to pass laws to keep them from being able to do that. And you have to have some body that enforces that those laws are being met.

[hereforinfo]

That's where the government is supposed to step in and define basic coverage rules.

What a joke. Our government needs to step in? Because they are so competent? That's a good one.

Every time our government "steps in" and makes some new regulation, there is always some sort of unanticipated consequence. Then they have to make a new regulation to fix that, which later causes another unanticipated consequence. Lather, rinse, repeat.

[OhioFiler]

In 1875 the American consumer spent 80% of his income on food. clothing and shelter. By 1995 that percentage was less than 30%.

If we budget correctly we can afford health care.

I don't need O'bama to operate my household.

[justbroke]

Healthcare has increased 50% in the last decade, have your wages?

I'm in 100% agreement with what you wrote, except that sentence is misleading.

Healthcare costs went from like 3% of an employee's earnings to 4.5%. While that's a 50% increase, it's not a "real" number when you're expressing the actual cost.

The problem is that to cover the 50% increase by your wages (from my theoretical 3% to 4.5%), your wages would only need to increase 2%, not 50%. Likewise, if say your costs went from 3% to 3.3% (a 10% increase), your salary only needs to increase 1/2 of 1%... not 10%.

Not everyone is a match expert, and using the "percent increase" is used to scare people, when the only thing necessary to cover the increase, is cost of living (COL) adjustments. If COL adjustments are normally 3% in Federal Government jobs, for example, then they easily cover any 10% "increase" in healthcare costs.

I think they can at least slow the cost curve down. I think it's going to take more than ONE bill to fix this system. While healthcare costs are a concern for me... I'm real concerned about other inflationary indicators. Gasoline, milk, bread and other commodities are what fluctuate and are a real headache, personally. Just have gasoline back at $5/gallon, and no one would be talking about healthcare.

[momisery]

I think one piece everyone is forgeting is that our economy is 2/3 consumer driven. Without people spending money on things other than healthcare you will see a good number of jobs dry up. Of course I guess we could all simply work in healthcare, but I don't see that as a reasonable option.

What is really wrong in America is honesty. We simply do not demand it and so many lack integrity and standing up for their convictions. Proof of that would be those who are against a public option, but are taking VA benefits or Medicare/medicaid. If we could return honestly to the top it would work its way down through our school systems.

Healthcare has increased 50% in the last decade, have your wages? It is set to increase 10% tis year, will your wages? My point is we can not afford it. The last time this issue came up with clintons insurance and healthcare providers promised they would control the costs, they did not need to be watched. Purely fictional as we can see. The costs are going up because they know we HAVE to pay for it. Are their clowns out there abusing the system? Of course there are, but pretending that would be the reason not to fix it the best we can makes no sense. Do we make all kids stay home on the weekends so they don't have sex, just because one did? Do we punish everyone for the crimes of one in America? Someone will always find a way around things, and I think the corrupt culture in Washington and Wall Street has reinforced that sort of behavior. Growing up I was thought hard work, honesty, ethics, charity, sympathy, today it is a robber baron attitude of they are too lazy! The truth is there are cheats, and there are most who simply can not become quarterbacks, or CEO's and make the big bucks. We are all born with gifts, and if you doubt that thing about becoming a quarterback it pays really well. Not everyone can do the upper income jobs, and that is okay. But all jobs must pay a living wage period. Growing up my uncle bought a home and had 5 kids, he pumped gas, changed oil and sold cigarettes at a local gas station. Could a person do that today that is working in a gas station store??? He was not the owner nor the manager... he just worked there and being willing to work is the whole issue. Make the day worth being there by paying enough, and that will make them want more. My brother raised his kids by dangleing a carrot in front of them. They got a car when they got out of high school. One went on to college, the other could not. She simply could not study well. Today she is very motivated in what she is good at and driven because she wants that new car, or new home. We need to learn to live within our budgets that is true, but the budgets need to be rich enough in rewards from working that we can do that and save too. Our incomes have been dropping while the rich have huge incomes that keeps growing. In the 60's CEO's make 47 times more than the average wage earner. Today, they make 450 times more... so who took all the wages.. pretty easy to see. Talk about redistribution of wealth they are experts at it.