U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-31-2019, 09:11 AM
 
52,978 posts, read 42,623,013 times
Reputation: 33206

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup View Post
Your post was long but the gist of it is insurance inflates costs. And yes I agree with that. Well, to some extent. Insurance used regularly inflates costs. Medical care has become something that is always covered under insurance. I would posture that I would much prefer to have insurance for large claims (pick your deductible, ie $5000, $10,000) for things like cancer etc and everything else is consumer paid.

What you are really talking about is getting insurance completely out of the low claim game, and I totally agree with that line of thinking. But Medicare for all will literally do the exact opposite. It will supply more money and drive more demand (don't take my word, that is exactly what happened in states that I implemented it).

Overall the big picture is that insurance companies do not make much money. They have been demonized when they are the messenger in this whole shindig. Their margins are low vs the volume of money that passes through their hands. Getting rid of them will not appreciably lower folks medical care costs.
The profit margins are low but the advertising costs, commissions, compliance costs with each different states laws and so on and so forth do add up.

Goes without saying that if there was one source that didn't have to compete and the customers had to come to them...and they didn't have to face brutal regulatory reviews for each individual state plus got to spread the costs of a computer system over vastly more insured then I wouldn't be surprised if you could cut out 10% or so off the premium.

The real savings imo would be that those not currently paying in and showing up at emergency rooms are dumping costs onto us. Just like if car dealers had 1 in 3 cars stolen so they charged the rest of us 50% more to cover that.

Putting it in place on national sales tax would ensure that EVERYBODY was contributing something, including the millions of people here illegally or that go without insurance that still get hurt in accidents or have an appendix rupture etc. and then stick all of the rest of us with the bill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-31-2019, 09:12 AM
 
13,261 posts, read 4,874,424 times
Reputation: 5460
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
The Dem’s?

Some of the candidates are not “ The Dems”.

Right now, two of the four front runners are NOT advocating for this.
No one is advocating that.

There is nothing "cadillac" about being dependent on your employer and insurance companies (which makes profits by denying care) for the health and well-being of your family. It puts tremendous power into the hands of the employer and is a big chain around the neck for the working class and middle class.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2019, 09:13 AM
 
13,261 posts, read 4,874,424 times
Reputation: 5460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
The profit margins are low but the advertising costs, commissions, compliance costs with each different states laws and so on and so forth do add up.

Goes without saying that if there was one source that didn't have to compete and the customers had to come to them...and they didn't have to face brutal regulatory reviews for each individual state plus got to spread the costs of a computer system over vastly more insured then I wouldn't be surprised if you could cut out 10% or so off the premium.

The real savings imo would be that those not currently paying in and showing up at emergency rooms are dumping costs onto us. Just like if car dealers had 1 in 3 cars stolen so they charged the rest of us 50% more to cover that.

Putting it in place on national sales tax would ensure that EVERYBODY was contributing something, including the millions of people here illegally or that go without insurance that still get hurt in accidents or have an appendix rupture etc. and then stick all of the rest of us with the bill.
Nothing is more costly than the crazy $40 000 average annual price tag for a family of four of the current system. To try to portray somewhat higher taxes for the average joe as just as bad and even worse than that $40 000 price tag is ridiculous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2019, 09:23 AM
 
5,955 posts, read 2,200,273 times
Reputation: 7522
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup View Post
The republicans have dropped the ball on healthcare and I am disappointed at it. My personal viewpoint is I disagree with the current system of no consumer price shopping and disagree with the proposed system of "use whatever you want because it's free". But insurance companies do accomplish a decent amount of price shopping on consumers behalf and do a good job of keeping a lid on increased costs.
Are you serious? Private Big Health Insurance has done a _horrible_ job of containing costs. As the chart shows, healthcare costs have been greatly outpacing inflation since 1985.

We can't fix the healthcare issue until we all first admit that the private insurance model in the U.S. is broken, doesn't work, and is not containing costs.



(US government FRED website allows hotlinking and is not copyrighted)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2019, 09:23 AM
 
12,304 posts, read 22,005,182 times
Reputation: 12233
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Is that why government health care is far cheaper than private health care in the rest of the world. Every time the government gets involved costs skyrocket, except everywhere else?
It's cheaper because they underpay by a considerable amount.

Just be careful what you wish for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2019, 09:24 AM
 
12,304 posts, read 22,005,182 times
Reputation: 12233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
Are you serious? Private Big Health Insurance has done a _horrible_ job of containing costs. As the chart shows, healthcare costs have been greatly outpacing inflation since 1985.


We can't fix the healthcare issue until we all first admit that the private insurance model in the U.S. is broken, doesn't work, and is not containing costs.





(US government FRED website allows hotlinking and is not copyrighted)
What you are witnessing isn't insurance companies increasing costs, it's the industry, and the insurance companies are simply the messenger passing them on.

This isn't hard to follow. Stay with me here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2019, 09:29 AM
 
12,304 posts, read 22,005,182 times
Reputation: 12233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
The profit margins are low but the advertising costs, commissions, compliance costs with each different states laws and so on and so forth do add up.

Goes without saying that if there was one source that didn't have to compete and the customers had to come to them...and they didn't have to face brutal regulatory reviews for each individual state plus got to spread the costs of a computer system over vastly more insured then I wouldn't be surprised if you could cut out 10% or so off the premium.

The real savings imo would be that those not currently paying in and showing up at emergency rooms are dumping costs onto us. Just like if car dealers had 1 in 3 cars stolen so they charged the rest of us 50% more to cover that.

Putting it in place on national sales tax would ensure that EVERYBODY was contributing something, including the millions of people here illegally or that go without insurance that still get hurt in accidents or have an appendix rupture etc. and then stick all of the rest of us with the bill.
Well at least you admit that taxes will go up to cover it. None of the candidates could even bring themselves to state that. Even when asked repeatedly, point blank yes or no!

Yes I understand, you pay premiums or you pay taxes. I get it. Some will win (mostly those who already pay low or no taxes) and many will lose (those who pay taxes).

The concern I have is that I simply don't think government does an efficient job at anything. Including healthcare. And I dislike further increasing government employment numbers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2019, 09:31 AM
 
12,304 posts, read 22,005,182 times
Reputation: 12233
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Nothing is more costly than the crazy $40 000 average annual price tag for a family of four of the current system. To try to portray somewhat higher taxes for the average joe as just as bad and even worse than that $40 000 price tag is ridiculous.
Exactly and I certainly do believe that the industry has gotten extremely bloated by shielding consumers from the actual costs.

HOWEVER, making the system "free" across the board will further escalate these costs and they will continue their upward spiral.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2019, 09:32 AM
 
7,319 posts, read 4,049,322 times
Reputation: 15091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
The very first thing this morning on the news after a few debate clips?

"The stage was filled with only white candidates."

I'm so F****** sick and tired about hearing crap like this.
Who said that? Which station?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2019, 09:38 AM
 
13,261 posts, read 4,874,424 times
Reputation: 5460
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup View Post
It's cheaper because they underpay by a considerable amount.

Just be careful what you wish for.
So everywhere else, its cheaper when the government is involved, but if we try to do it, it will be the opposite?

Only big pharma CEOs can make themselves to believe such nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top