Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Federal insurance for catastrophic medical costs on behalf of individuals:
Excerpted from Congressman Paul Ryan’s web site. He forwarded a transcript concerning his positions of regarding USA’s healthcare policies; Racine [WI] Journal News, Mark Schaaf, July 7, 20217.
“Republicans have proposed the federal and state governments subsidize the cost of care for people in the individual market with catastrophic illnesses, Ryan said. He believes that will make it easier to insure people in those high-risk pools at a more affordable price”.
Paul Ryan’s advocating federal insuring catastrophic medical costs of individuals. That’s a concept that both sides of the political ailse could agree upon.
I’m a proponent for federal acceptance of fiscal responsibility for catastrophic medical condition regardless if patients were or were not previously insured. Hospitals must be reimbursed for those extraordinary expenditures.
But not for those who use drugs recreationally, abuse alcohol, smoke tobacco or just being a plain old glutton at the dinner table. They brought their condition on themselves and I don’t want to pay for their stupidity.
Has to be. Obamacare covers this now. If we move away from Obamacare this is one very msjor aspect that needs attention and coverage.
Unfortunately, the number of medical bankruptcies have barely dropped for those that have medical insurance. ObamaCareNot? Yeah, cut it loose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-310
But not for those who use drugs recreationally, abuse alcohol, smoke tobacco or just being a plain old glutton at the dinner table. They brought their condition on themselves and I don’t want to pay for their stupidity.
They are already costing us a bundle, those that rely on the government (taxpayer) rather than personal responsibility.
We need affordable care, not health insurance which just puts money in the pockets of the insurers. Make it like Medicare or Medicaid, and more providers won't take the reimbursements or have to close up shop because they were taking the reimbursements and couldn't stay financially afloat.
Care did not become "affordable", we just propped up the health insurance industry because they were losing money as those that had been insured when employed were not longer insured as the businesses left the country. Sadly, our major industries are the healthcare industry, health insurance industry, big pharma, prison industry and the poverty industry - think about it.
Unfortunately, the number of medical bankruptcies have barely dropped for those that have medical insurance. ObamaCareNot? Yeah, cut it loose.
They are already costing us a bundle, those that rely on the government (taxpayer) rather than personal responsibility.
We need affordable care, not health insurance which just puts money in the pockets of the insurers. Make it like Medicare or Medicaid, and more providers won't take the reimbursements or have to close up shop because they were taking the reimbursements and couldn't stay financially afloat.
Care did not become "affordable", we just propped up the health insurance industry because they were losing money as those that had been insured when employed were not longer insured as the businesses left the country. Sadly, our major industries are the healthcare industry, health insurance industry, big pharma, prison industry and the poverty industry - think about it.
I say too bad. Cut them off from the taxpayers trough.
... They are already costing us a bundle, those that rely on the government (taxpayer) rather than personal responsibility. ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-310
But not for those who use drugs recreationally, abuse alcohol, smoke tobacco or just being a plain old glutton at the dinner table. They brought their condition on themselves and I don’t want to pay for their stupidity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose
... I would think that our nation could provide universal catastrophic coverage. Through a combination of means tested premiums, taxes and deficit spending.
Your numbers are too low.
HooNose, the annual catastrophic amount is a number for congressional debate but whatever they determine should be annually cost-of-living adjusted. Determination of a greater catastrophic-amount increases insurers' costs, prices, and induces the young and/or healthy to refrain from purchasing medical insurance; increasing the age and reducing the health of insured persons' pools and increasing insurance prices for all.
Federal catastrophic medical insurance should be a free entitlement of every legal USA resident and not be passed on to any other government or non-government insurance entity. The alternative is our governments' and hospitals now invariably directly or indirectly by far pay the greatest proportions of our nations' individuals' annual catastrophic medical costs.
Federal catastrophic medical insurance would be of advantage to our current or whatever will be our nation's future medical policy and practices.
This a slippery slope for Paul Ryan. As right wing purist and man of principle how does he reconcile government paid healthcare for some but not for all?
Context.
"I would not support this if writing on a policy blank slate, but given the ACA exists and repeal of it has failed this is much better than the status quo" is probably more or less his internal monologue.
The ACA already does this. Costs go to premiums, premiums get subsidized for people under 400% of FPL. However, as a consequence people over 400% of FPL have to pay life-alteringly high premiums, go without medical insurance, or look for a loophole out of the law (like the healthcare cost sharing ministries). One way or another the ACA generates coverage of catastrophic illnesses. The choice is (assuming repeal can't get done), let it work as-is and push upper middle class people out of the individual health insurance marketplace through ridiculously high premiums or do it directly and not have that unintended consequence.
WhoGo, “BCBS”, one among some various county boards of social services?
Yes; certainly the financial burden of floods, tornadoes and other hughe detrimental effects due to the catastrophic “acts of god” that occur within the year and befall less than 5% of individuals residing within our nation, are more bearable if those burdens are shared among our entire nation.
"I would not support this if writing on a policy blank slate, but given the ACA exists and repeal of it has failed this is much better than the status quo" is probably more or less his internal monologue.
The ACA already does this. Costs go to premiums, premiums get subsidized for people under 400% of FPL. However, as a consequence people over 400% of FPL have to pay life-alteringly high premiums, go without medical insurance, or look for a loophole out of the law (like the healthcare cost sharing ministries). One way or another the ACA generates coverage of catastrophic illnesses. The choice is (assuming repeal can't get done), let it work as-is and push upper middle class people out of the individual health insurance marketplace through ridiculously high premiums or do it directly and not have that unintended consequence.
ALackOfCreativity, hospital bills are often uncollectible. Hospital bills are paid by the patients' medical insurers, or the patients and their families, or by charities. Statistically (IF catastrophic hospital bills were paid), they were almost always paid by government or non-government medical insures.
Catastrophic individuals' medical costs in aggregate, more or less severely upset the budgets of their payers, (government or non-government medical insurers).
Our governments directly and indirectly support hospitals within their jurisdictions. Our federal government directly and indirectly supports medical costs of states and local governments. It's apparent that we taxpayers through our governments' annual budgets and catastrophic medical costs past on within the prices we pay for our family's medical insurance, are paying very substantial portions of our nation's aggregate individuals' catastrophic hospital bills.
Hospital insurance is a substantial portions of medical insurance costs. Many, I believe most medical insurance plans itemize hospital insurance and the remainder of their insurance coverage as two separate price items. Substantial portions of hospital insurance costs are aggregate individuals' catastrophic medical expenses.
If the mandated adequate individual insurance coverage is eliminated, younger and healthier people will refrain from purchasing “expensive” medical insurance. The remainder of our insured pool will be older, less healthy, and cost more to insure.
It's logical that we rather provide federal catastrophic medical insurance at no additional cost to insurers or their clients.
Beware of what you wish for. If the Affordable Care Act's prohibiting price considerations for previous medical conditions is unsustainable, that would effectively be medical insurances' great pricing increase.
Those advocating elimination of the individual mandate and preventing Medicaid expansion, do not state they're advocating much less insurance coverage at greater prices.
HooNose, referring to post #27, from your personal views and professional opinions you may have formed due to acquaintances among colleagues and within hospitals, do you find the post logical?
Universal health insurance with copays and deductibles. Kind of like Medicare. The supplements can be private just as they are now.
I have a friend ruined by medical. Another who went thru 6 months of hell when his live in girlfriend was garnished by an out of network radiologist prowling the E room of an in network hospital where they took their daughter.
I have several friends who are being ruined month by month due to their HUGE Obamacare premiums.
But not for those who use drugs recreationally, abuse alcohol, smoke tobacco or just being a plain old glutton at the dinner table. They brought their condition on themselves and I don’t want to pay for their stupidity.
I suppose you feel the same way about people who jog (thousands of knee surgeries), play football, climb ladders, drive motorcycles, sunbathe on the beach, abuse legal drugs, text while driving, and spend too much time watching TV. They brought their condition on themselves and I'm sure you don’t want to pay for their stupidity.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
