U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-22-2010, 09:11 AM
 
Location: San Diego California
6,797 posts, read 6,665,031 times
Reputation: 5180

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
Bascailly in 1979 when you went to teh doctors office you certainly were not goig to be lined up for medical chack to test your blood ;your colon and other testig that can now catch many things so early. About teh highest tech a typical doctors office had was X-ray. Thatwas a time of major medical coverage that only covered when you had a major hospital sstay. There was no dental ro office visit coverage. Youalos got less treatment and doctors did not have much liabilty for missing anhting. Then people wanted more coverage to apy for even office visits ;testing and even medicine. Deamnd drive many cost. Want a MRI easily available then its has a life span and has to have setup.You can still live and get about teh same medical treatment now days if you insist and at adjusted rates as to 1979. But you may alos have them cut you open and then sew you backup with the advanced treatments like then.If everybody wanted that care then we alos would see the death arte go up and life span decrese tot hsoe levls or worse with teh bad phyiocal contiion of people now than then.Heart conditions now causedby eating junk fofod and too mcuh would alone have death rates increase by age.Right now the coverage mandated is going to drive the cost up.
The multitude of tests run today compared with 1979 have less to do with need, and more to do with CYA. The doctors and hospitals are forced to do unneeded tests to protect themselves from predatory lawyers who make a living from mal practice suits. Of course the Health Care Act does nothing to address that problem. Lawyers are one of the Democrats special interest groups.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-22-2010, 11:16 AM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 20,170,177 times
Reputation: 15736
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
The same is true for those who want "free" health care but think someone else is going to pay for it. .
Sigh. Here's just one of thousands of examples of how our "health insurance" system works for a "respectable," employed American Citizen, a real person who is a close friend of mine.

Gender: F

Age: 52

Profession: university assoc. professor

Guessed income: $70,000?

Insured: by her university, good plan, fully covered

Life complications: taking care of both elderly parents financially

Health complication: she develops a highly debilitating cancer

Result: she is so sick she can hardly work, finally leaves her job, no choice

Insured: Keeps on with Cobra payments to the max
Note: Group health coverage for COBRA participants is usually more
expensive than health coverage for active employees

Earned income now: 0

Progression: cancer develops to Stage IV.

Insured: insurance ends

Help for her: denied unemployment (she quit). Denied disability.

Upshot: she lives on savings, running out; no longer insured.

Hospital bill: following visits, tests, surgery, chemo, etc---unimaginable

Today: faces foreclosure and being taken to court for medical bills, all while enduring the devastation of stage IV cancer


Nice scenario. And this is a "respectable" employed American
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 10:48 PM
 
Location: Ohio
22,798 posts, read 16,091,197 times
Reputation: 19294
Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl View Post
Nice scenario. And this is a "respectable" employed American
And a scenario she helped create.

Sometimes wanting something is more pleasurable than actually having the thing you want, like "health insurance."

While she may have been a "'respecable' employed American" apparently was an ignorant or 'unrespectable' member of the electorate.

She bought into the lies proffered by the health care industry and now she's paying for it.

Sob stories like this don't make me even considering thinking about wanting to support a national health care plan.

What would make me decide to take the time to even think about a national health care plan is enacting legislation to outlaw the hospital cartels. I'd even settle for enforcement of current monopoly laws already on the books.

If hospitals were illegal then a group of oncologists would establish an oncology center. Maybe they would purchase an old farmhouse in a beautiful wooded area with a small pond. The oncology center wouldn't have to pay for an $8 Million parking garage (like a hospital here recently did) and wouldn't be hiring attorneys to enforce eminent domain laws (like a hospital recently did here) to purchase additional land (like a hospital did here) to expand its already grotesquely inefficient system of health care delivery.

Because the oncologists don't have have a private security/police force with a multi-$Million budget, and because they don't have a Trauma Center with huge liability and great costs, and because they don't have an emergency room with tremendous liability and huge operating expenses and because they don't have a psychiatric ward with the special pharmacy with the specially trained and licenses pharmacologists and pharmacy assistants to maintain the psychotropic drugs and because they don't have a Head of Pschiatry or an Assistant Head of Psychiatry or a Chief Psychiatric resident or half a dozen psychiatric residents or nurses or CNAs or LPNS, or diagnostic technicians and support staff and a large area that has to be cleaned and maintained, they can provide high-quality cancer health care at very low cost.

Now take the costs of all that and multiply it by each "service" an hospital offers, like OB-Gyn, neo-natal, pre-natal, weight loss, orthopedics, cardiology, internal medicine, geriatrics pediatrics, neuro-vascular, neuro-surgery etc etc etc etc ad infinitum ad nauseum.

What would also make me take the time to even consider thinking about support a national health care plan is doing something about the "health insurance" companies.

For starters, the use of the term "health insurance" is fraudulent because it implies the use of actuarial science when in fact it is not employed at all.

It is illogical that a single person should pay a higher premium for "health insurance" than a family of two, or three, or four of five who avail themselves of far more medical services than a single person.

It is also illogical and unreasonable to charge someone who engages in risky behavior and poor personal health the same amount as someone who engages in no risky behavior and actively engages in their own preventive medicine.

And of course a system (like health care) that is largely "not-for-profit" operating in tandem with "health insurance" which is "for-profit" is nonsensical.

Anyway, how ironic is it that your friend allowed a system to be created by or through her own apathy, ignorance or selfish interests and now that system has reduced her "poverty" level?

Had she participated in the system as an informed member of the electorate she'd probably be at the oncology center sitting next to the pond drinking a cup of ceai and watching the ducks and she would have saved 65%-70% of her money (which wouldn't have gotten wasted subsidizing hospital services that she never used, like pediatrics).

If you called Papa John's and ordered an extra-large double topping pizza with everything on it and they delivered a small cheese pizza but still charged you for an extra-large double topping with everything you'd be screaming bloody murder yet you're willing to sally forth into an hospital and fork over every dime you have to doctors and residents and interns and RNs and CNAs and LPNs and technicians and staff and maintenance persons and floor space and beds and security services and administrators and clerks and all manner of diagnostic services and equipment that you don't even use.

And you and people like you think you're smart.

I'm laughing at the superior intellect.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 06:28 AM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 20,170,177 times
Reputation: 15736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
And a scenario she helped create.....
Anyway, how ironic is it that your friend allowed a system to be created by or through her own apathy, ignorance or selfish interests and now that system has reduced her "poverty" level?

Had she participated in the system as an informed member of the electorate she'd probably be at the oncology center sitting next to the pond drinking a cup of ceai and watching the ducks and she would have saved 65%-70% of her money (which wouldn't have gotten wasted subsidizing hospital services that she never used, like pediatrics).

And you and people like you think you're smart.

I'm laughing at the superior intellect.
1) Well, what have you personally done to create the scenario of an oncology center next to the pond? Exactly what electorate are you speaking of that would eliminate the hospital cartels and fraudulent insurance companies? (What country do you live in?)

2) And who is "you and people like you"???

3) And your superior intellect has done what for you, as far as health insurance goes?

4) Try to respond without teenage style insults.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 06:53 AM
 
2,409 posts, read 2,805,073 times
Reputation: 2031
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaggy001 View Post
But most Americans have been insulated from the real cost of their health care either through employer subsidized insurance or by government schemes such as medicare/medicaid/va/etc. As an increasing number of Americans start to pay more of the real cost, expect pressure on politicians to "do something" about it. The only way health care costs can be controlled is through government intervention. That is why costs in Europe are so much lower. The health care industry is in the process of killing the "golden goose". If this trend continues, we will have taxpayer funded UHC much faster than anyone thinks.

Americans may believe, in principal, that private health care is better but when it is costing them several thousand dollars a year more than they are paying now then that belief will erode real quick.
Wow this is the level of thought we have been reduced to in this country? The only way to control health care costs is with government intervention. The way you bring down healthcare costs is by increasing supply and decreasing demand. How do you increase supply? Increase technology, increase innovation that will make healthcare cheaper. How to decrease demand? Let's get people healthier.......let's focus on preventing disease instead of managing it. To increasing innovation in the private sector you have to cut government regulations, offer tax breaks and incentives to companies to innovate.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 10:43 AM
 
48,508 posts, read 89,047,236 times
Reputation: 18195
Universal healthcare sin't goig to happen. Why;just look at the fundign propoasal in the present plan. The very groups that proposed it refused to have any resonssibilty i funding it. Every specail ionterest i the democrtic party refused proposals that would have taxed them to fund it. Even the bill now counts on so called savings form cutting waste ;frud and abuse to bring cost down to make it defcit nutural. The huge deficit i othe rspending has made more entitlements unlikely for deacdes to come. Itsdonw the same thing in europe but they have actaully had to do it sooner because of the danger of being to close to the financial edge like spain.You can not affors thing when you have so few actaully supporting the government with contributiing. Its become a race to see who can actaully make the government support them instead of supporting the government.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 12:35 PM
 
Location: Ohio
22,798 posts, read 16,091,197 times
Reputation: 19294
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalCroozer View Post
Wow this is the level of thought we have been reduced to in this country? The only way to control health care costs is with government intervention.
I'm anti-big government, but if government intervention is needed to force the health care industry to step in line with Capitalist Theory, Market Economics and Public Policy then I'm all for it, at least until it equalizes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalCroozer View Post
The way you bring down healthcare costs is by increasing supply and decreasing demand. How do you increase supply? Increase technology, increase innovation that will make healthcare cheaper. How to decrease demand? Let's get people healthier.
It doesn't work that way.

In the first place, health care is a service, not a product like corn or iron ingots or Izod LaCoste shirts and pants.

Also you're totally ignoring the reality of Diminishing Returns, Opportunity Cost, Capacity, Economy of Scale and Market Size.

In 1984 I paid $2400 for an Epson QX-16 computer. It had two 5 1/4" floppy drives and $795 for a 4-head VCR with 2 audio heads.

About 10 years later you could buy a 4-head VCR with 2 audio heads for $69 on sale at Wal-Mart and then I paid $385 for a laptop that does more than my Epson QX-16 could even dream of doing.

When DVD players fist came out they were nearly $1,000 but now you can buy them for $45.

The point is that when new technology is introduced to the market, it is very expensive, but over time the price drops and often drastically.

It's an issue of Supply vs Demand.

No one in the right mind would manufacture and stock-pile 12 Million XBOX 360s and then simultaneously dump them on the market.

You make 500 and if they sell, then you ramp up production to meet demand and then you reach an equilibrium.

But that does not apply to health care technology.

An MRI machine costs anywhere from $2.3 Million to $3 Million.

You want every American to have an MRI machine in their home? Because that's the only way you're going to get the price of an MRI machine to drop below $1 Million.

Who's going to pay for that?

You want Americans to put it on their credit card or on their HELOC?

How about 0% interest and 720 month payments?

Sorry, but here is where reality bites.

There's only so many hospitals and so many clinics and that is just the way it is. You could put a hospital on every block and it still wouldn't drop the price of an MRI machine below $1 Million.

But you would bankrupt the US.

Um, here's a novel question:

How do you recoup the cost on the $2.3 Million MRI machine you just purchased?

Well, you charge patients to use it.

Can 120 people use an MRI machine at one time? No.

How many people can use an MRI machine? If the average cycle run is 34 minutes you could do 14 people in an 8 hour day and how much would you have to charge them to recover your costs?

Oh, yes, thank you very little. Maybe we can pass a law to force people to use MRI machines and require every American to be tested 2 times per week.

Did I mention it costs anywhere from $350,000 to $500,000 to build an MRI Suite?

Oh, you just can't stick an MRI machine anywhere you want, and there is a certain standard of construction.

And who pays the salaries, taxes and benefits of the technicians and maintenance people?

Shall we discuss all of the multi-$Million hospital gadgetry?


There's no doubt you're part of the Under-25 crowd.

Healthy Americans are one of the reasons why you are all in the mess you're in now, and if you were around in the late 1970s you would have known that.

And so what are you going to do when Americans get healthy?

I'll restate your premise in a way that everyone can easily understand.

You own a restaurant and whenever people come to your restaurant, your staff insults them with racial slurs, ridicules and debases them, always gets the order wrong serves the food cold, and spills half of it all over the customers.

Naturally, thee are some sad people who are co-dependent and have very low self-esteem and they actually think your restaurant is deserving of 5 Stars in the Mobile Restaurant Guide.

The problem is those 5 people aren't going to provide you with enough revenue to keep your restaurant open and you'll have to close.

Healthy Americans are anathema to the health care industry.

Since you now at least have a clue about how much the hospital gadgetry costs, how is the health care industry going to recover the $100s of Billions they laid to increase Supply?

Oh, raise health care costs. Yeah, of course, been there done that.

Or do you think we still need a national health care plan to keep the hospitals and clinics open?

Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl
1) Well, what have you personally done to create the scenario of an oncology center next to the pond?
I'm Neutral Good so why would I care? People die, it's a fact of life, get over it.

However, to that extent, a group of cardio-pulmonary doctors attempted to open a cardio-pulmonary center where they would only perform open heart surgery and they would not do anything else.

And because the cardio-pulmonary center would not have had a private security/police force with a multi-$Million budget, and because they don't have a Trauma Center with huge liability and great costs, and because they don't have an emergency room with tremendous liability and huge operating expenses and because they don't have a psychiatric ward with the special pharmacy with the specially trained and licenses pharmacologists and pharmacy assistants to maintain the psychotropic drugs and because they don't have a Head of Pschiatry or an Assistant Head of Psychiatry or a Chief Psychiatric resident or half a dozen psychiatric residents or nurses or CNAs or LPNS, or diagnostic technicians and support staff and a large area that has to be cleaned and maintained, they would have been able to provide high-quality open-heart surgery at a very low cost.

In fact, as reported in the Cincinnasti Enquirer, it would have cost $13,000 less than the price charged the cheapest hospital in one of the two illegal groups operating a cartel, which is a monopolistic practice.

The two hospital cartels and their "health insurance" company lackeys ran to Columbus and had legislation rammed through to out-law it.

I did send e-mails to my state senator and representative, and I did protest with others in front of the offices of Tri-Health, one of the illegal health care cartels and I did vote against representatives who outlawed the clinic, since it outlawed most other types of clinics as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl
Exactly what electorate are you speaking of that would eliminate the hospital cartels and fraudulent insurance companies?
Well, that would be you sweetheart. You just have to tell your state and federal legislators.

And if they do nothing, then when you go to the polls to vote, you vote against them, even if it means voting for the "other party" or voting for an independent, or a communist or a socialist or a "green party" member or a member of the Idiot Party.

That's called moral courage and intestinal fortitude (and having a spine).

It is very American to scream about oil cartels but when it comes to hospital and health care cartels, it looks like everyone scuttles away whimpering with their tails between their legs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl
(What country do you live in?)
What does it matter?

I'm a Romanian but I was born in the US. I'm a decorated veteran who killed people so your CIA could continue to have a source of undetectable funding and so you could have oil.

I live in Romania, except for when I lived in the UK and except for military service and except for attending university.

I'm here now having surgeries to fix some damage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl
2) And who is "you and people like you"???
People like you, well, if you had a hole in the roof of your house and rain leaked in and damaged the carpet you would demand that the government provide you with national carpet insurance, inside of fixing the real problem, which happens to be the hole in the roof where the rain comes in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl
3) And your superior intellect has done what for you, as far as health insurance goes?
I've have always rejected health insurance.

Obviously during military service I had access to military hospitals, well sort of. After a $10 fee was levied on the civilian families that are allowed to use the facility had access. At least I didn't have to wait 3 hours.

I also had "health insurance" because the university requires it, which I believe is illegal.

For all other jobs I've had I rejected "health insurance." I realize now that was the wrong thing to do.

What I should have done was accepted the "health insurance" and then filed a lawsuit against the "health insurance" company for fraud, deception and false advertising, since the use of the word "insurance" is a misrepresentation:

Quote:
A misrepresentation is any statement by words or other conduct that, under the circumstances, amounts to an assertion that is false or erroneous, i.e., not in accordance with the facts. A misrepresentation, therefore, may be intentional or negligent, i.e., a "fraudulent misrepresentation" or a negligent misrepresentation."
"Insurance" implies the use of actuarial science to determine risk, and "health insurance" does not employ actuarial science to determine risk.

I also should have alleged in my complaint that I was coerced into enrolling in the program in order to obtain a benefit equivalent to my co-workers.

In other words, I would want the court to rule that if I reject "health insurance" then my employer must provide me with something else that is equivalent to the benefit my co-workers receive.

That is to say if my employer pays $180 per month for in "health insurance" benefits then I should receive additional cash in the amount of $180 per month if I reject "health insurance."

In the alternative instead of cash, I should receive Holiday Pay in the amount of $180

Or in the alternative I should receive some other benefit, like tuition reimbursement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl
4) Try to respond without teenage style insults.
Well then try to grow up and get a clue.

I notice you did not attempt to refute a single point I made, rather you made a lame re-direction at me.

But that only shows you're clueless.

I seriously doubt you'd be able to offer any explanation as to how the US went from 11 national "health insurance" companies and 5 regional "health insurance" companies to more than 860 "health insurance" companies in less than 6 years from 1978 to 1984.

After the Chapter 7 & 11 Bankruptcies, mergers, acquisitions, leveraged buyouts and hostile take over that was reduced to 600+ "health insurance" companies by 1988.

Something must have happened for everyone to get a wild hair up their ass and go ballistic with "health insurance" companies, but as usual, no one wants to fix the hole in the roof.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 01:27 PM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 20,170,177 times
Reputation: 15736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
I'm anti-big government, but if government intervention is needed to force the health care industry to step in line with Capitalist Theory, Market Economics and Public Policy then I'm all for it, at least until it equalizes.



It doesn't work that way.

In the first place, health care is a service, not a product like corn or iron ingots or Izod LaCoste shirts and pants.

Also you're totally ignoring the reality of Diminishing Returns, Opportunity Cost, Capacity, Economy of Scale and Market Size.

In 1984 I paid $2400 for an Epson QX-16 computer. It had two 5 1/4" floppy drives and $795 for a 4-head VCR with 2 audio heads.

About 10 years later you could buy a 4-head VCR with 2 audio heads for $69 on sale at Wal-Mart and then I paid $385 for a laptop that does more than my Epson QX-16 could even dream of doing.

When DVD players fist came out they were nearly $1,000 but now you can buy them for $45.

The point is that when new technology is introduced to the market, it is very expensive, but over time the price drops and often drastically.

It's an issue of Supply vs Demand.

No one in the right mind would manufacture and stock-pile 12 Million XBOX 360s and then simultaneously dump them on the market.

You make 500 and if they sell, then you ramp up production to meet demand and then you reach an equilibrium.

But that does not apply to health care technology.

An MRI machine costs anywhere from $2.3 Million to $3 Million.

You want every American to have an MRI machine in their home? Because that's the only way you're going to get the price of an MRI machine to drop below $1 Million.

Who's going to pay for that?

You want Americans to put it on their credit card or on their HELOC?

How about 0% interest and 720 month payments?

Sorry, but here is where reality bites.

There's only so many hospitals and so many clinics and that is just the way it is. You could put a hospital on every block and it still wouldn't drop the price of an MRI machine below $1 Million.

But you would bankrupt the US.

Um, here's a novel question:

How do you recoup the cost on the $2.3 Million MRI machine you just purchased?

Well, you charge patients to use it.

Can 120 people use an MRI machine at one time? No.

How many people can use an MRI machine? If the average cycle run is 34 minutes you could do 14 people in an 8 hour day and how much would you have to charge them to recover your costs?

Oh, yes, thank you very little. Maybe we can pass a law to force people to use MRI machines and require every American to be tested 2 times per week.

Did I mention it costs anywhere from $350,000 to $500,000 to build an MRI Suite?

Oh, you just can't stick an MRI machine anywhere you want, and there is a certain standard of construction.

And who pays the salaries, taxes and benefits of the technicians and maintenance people?

Shall we discuss all of the multi-$Million hospital gadgetry?


There's no doubt you're part of the Under-25 crowd.

Healthy Americans are one of the reasons why you are all in the mess you're in now, and if you were around in the late 1970s you would have known that.

And so what are you going to do when Americans get healthy?

I'll restate your premise in a way that everyone can easily understand.

You own a restaurant and whenever people come to your restaurant, your staff insults them with racial slurs, ridicules and debases them, always gets the order wrong serves the food cold, and spills half of it all over the customers.

Naturally, thee are some sad people who are co-dependent and have very low self-esteem and they actually think your restaurant is deserving of 5 Stars in the Mobile Restaurant Guide.

The problem is those 5 people aren't going to provide you with enough revenue to keep your restaurant open and you'll have to close.

Healthy Americans are anathema to the health care industry.

Since you now at least have a clue about how much the hospital gadgetry costs, how is the health care industry going to recover the $100s of Billions they laid to increase Supply?

Oh, raise health care costs. Yeah, of course, been there done that.

Or do you think we still need a national health care plan to keep the hospitals and clinics open?



I'm Neutral Good so why would I care? People die, it's a fact of life, get over it.

However, to that extent, a group of cardio-pulmonary doctors attempted to open a cardio-pulmonary center where they would only perform open heart surgery and they would not do anything else.

And because the cardio-pulmonary center would not have had a private security/police force with a multi-$Million budget, and because they don't have a Trauma Center with huge liability and great costs, and because they don't have an emergency room with tremendous liability and huge operating expenses and because they don't have a psychiatric ward with the special pharmacy with the specially trained and licenses pharmacologists and pharmacy assistants to maintain the psychotropic drugs and because they don't have a Head of Pschiatry or an Assistant Head of Psychiatry or a Chief Psychiatric resident or half a dozen psychiatric residents or nurses or CNAs or LPNS, or diagnostic technicians and support staff and a large area that has to be cleaned and maintained, they would have been able to provide high-quality open-heart surgery at a very low cost.

In fact, as reported in the Cincinnasti Enquirer, it would have cost $13,000 less than the price charged the cheapest hospital in one of the two illegal groups operating a cartel, which is a monopolistic practice.

The two hospital cartels and their "health insurance" company lackeys ran to Columbus and had legislation rammed through to out-law it.

I did send e-mails to my state senator and representative, and I did protest with others in front of the offices of Tri-Health, one of the illegal health care cartels and I did vote against representatives who outlawed the clinic, since it outlawed most other types of clinics as well.



Well, that would be you sweetheart. You just have to tell your state and federal legislators.

And if they do nothing, then when you go to the polls to vote, you vote against them, even if it means voting for the "other party" or voting for an independent, or a communist or a socialist or a "green party" member or a member of the Idiot Party.

That's called moral courage and intestinal fortitude (and having a spine).

It is very American to scream about oil cartels but when it comes to hospital and health care cartels, it looks like everyone scuttles away whimpering with their tails between their legs.



What does it matter?

I'm a Romanian but I was born in the US. I'm a decorated veteran who killed people so your CIA could continue to have a source of undetectable funding and so you could have oil.

I live in Romania, except for when I lived in the UK and except for military service and except for attending university.

I'm here now having surgeries to fix some damage.



People like you, well, if you had a hole in the roof of your house and rain leaked in and damaged the carpet you would demand that the government provide you with national carpet insurance, inside of fixing the real problem, which happens to be the hole in the roof where the rain comes in.



I've have always rejected health insurance.

Obviously during military service I had access to military hospitals, well sort of. After a $10 fee was levied on the civilian families that are allowed to use the facility had access. At least I didn't have to wait 3 hours.

I also had "health insurance" because the university requires it, which I believe is illegal.

For all other jobs I've had I rejected "health insurance." I realize now that was the wrong thing to do.

What I should have done was accepted the "health insurance" and then filed a lawsuit against the "health insurance" company for fraud, deception and false advertising, since the use of the word "insurance" is a misrepresentation:

"Insurance" implies the use of actuarial science to determine risk, and "health insurance" does not employ actuarial science to determine risk.

I also should have alleged in my complaint that I was coerced into enrolling in the program in order to obtain a benefit equivalent to my co-workers.

In other words, I would want the court to rule that if I reject "health insurance" then my employer must provide me with something else that is equivalent to the benefit my co-workers receive.

That is to say if my employer pays $180 per month for in "health insurance" benefits then I should receive additional cash in the amount of $180 per month if I reject "health insurance."

In the alternative instead of cash, I should receive Holiday Pay in the amount of $180

Or in the alternative I should receive some other benefit, like tuition reimbursement.



Well then try to grow up and get a clue.

I notice you did not attempt to refute a single point I made, rather you made a lame re-direction at me.

But that only shows you're clueless.

I seriously doubt you'd be able to offer any explanation as to how the US went from 11 national "health insurance" companies and 5 regional "health insurance" companies to more than 860 "health insurance" companies in less than 6 years from 1978 to 1984.

After the Chapter 7 & 11 Bankruptcies, mergers, acquisitions, leveraged buyouts and hostile take over that was reduced to 600+ "health insurance" companies by 1988.

Something must have happened for everyone to get a wild hair up their ass and go ballistic with "health insurance" companies, but as usual, no one wants to fix the hole in the roof.

Unlike some, including yourself, who want a good fight, I am on the forums to try to understand others' viewpoints. I would like to understand yours better, but your style of delivery is less than adult.

I agree with you about the gouging "healthcare" industry and hospitals. My first two children were born in birthing centers, in houses in an inner city. There was no hospital involved, so the cost was not high, and the care was excellent. No contest there.

I definitely agree with your statement: "Healthy Americans are anathema to the health care industry." Wonder why we can send people to the moon but can't cure diseases, with all the research money being thrown at them.

About Americans (as a nation) getting healthy: it will never happen. Our medical system is built on disease, not health. In some former cultures people payed doctors to keep them well, not so much to treat them when they got sick. Maybe we should try that: "Sorry, doc, you didn't keep me healthy and now you want me to get this expensive treatment, so you pay for it." Sounds right to me.

Maybe we agree on more that you think. If only you could lose the superiority complex....
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 03:31 PM
 
Location: San Diego California
6,797 posts, read 6,665,031 times
Reputation: 5180
The majority of healthcare could be performed at much lower costs by neighborhood clinics. But until we solve the liability problems, that is just not going to happen. The biggest problem in health care was never even addressed.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2010, 04:16 AM
 
8,864 posts, read 10,626,911 times
Reputation: 11521
Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl View Post
Sigh. Here's just one of thousands of examples of how our "health insurance" system works for a "respectable," employed American Citizen, a real person who is a close friend of mine.

Gender: F

Age: 52

Profession: university assoc. professor

Guessed income: $70,000?

Insured: by her university, good plan, fully covered

Life complications: taking care of both elderly parents financially

Health complication: she develops a highly debilitating cancer

Result: she is so sick she can hardly work, finally leaves her job, no choice

Insured: Keeps on with Cobra payments to the max
Note: Group health coverage for COBRA participants is usually more
expensive than health coverage for active employees

Earned income now: 0

Progression: cancer develops to Stage IV.

Insured: insurance ends

Help for her: denied unemployment (she quit). Denied disability.

Upshot: she lives on savings, running out; no longer insured.

Hospital bill: following visits, tests, surgery, chemo, etc---unimaginable

Today: faces foreclosure and being taken to court for medical bills, all while enduring the devastation of stage IV cancer


Nice scenario. And this is a "respectable" employed American
This should not be possible in the US. We consider ourselves such an advanced country, yet this happens. Unacceptable.
Rate this post positively 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 > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top