Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
 [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 08-31-2012, 04:05 PM
 
Location: The Triad
34,092 posts, read 83,000,140 times
Reputation: 43666

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by netbrad View Post
Then how is it when I changed jobs, my Cobra premium...
How many THOUSANDS in wages have you sacrificed to have that group HI policy?
Why don't you get a group policy for your Auto or Home insurance?

Last edited by MrRational; 08-31-2012 at 04:17 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-31-2012, 04:19 PM
 
875 posts, read 1,162,834 times
Reputation: 1174
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
How much in WAGES are you sacrificing to have THAT group HI policy?
Why don't you get a group policy for your Auto or Home insurance?
The wage issue is irrelevant because it would be a wash. If I got that money as wages it would just get spent on health care anyway so there would be no cost savings. Health care costs would be higher in that situation because no single person could negotiate discounts.

The group policy for home and auto doesn't work because usually only one person owns a home or car, while multiple people work for a business so they can be bundled.

Now, if they allowed interstate competition between health insurance providers then untying insurance from your employer makes sense due to lower overall costs due to said competition.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2012, 04:29 PM
 
Location: The Triad
34,092 posts, read 83,000,140 times
Reputation: 43666
Quote:
Originally Posted by netbrad View Post
The wage issue is irrelevant...
No, it isn't. It is entirely relevant.

It is the #1 underlying distortion in what passes for a medical care payment system in the US.
The #2 underlying distortion is the over reliance on "HI policies" for care that has no cause to involve insurance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2012, 07:39 PM
 
3,375 posts, read 6,262,828 times
Reputation: 2453
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDD View Post
The point is those of us who choose to pay for Health Ins. have to also pay for the deadbeats that won't pay. I don't have to contribute to the deadbeats who don't insure their property.
Sorry bud, but you already pay for them. The cost is built in to your paid care. If we get everyone to start paying into the pot, then what you pay will go to your care, and not other peoples.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarheelhombre View Post
We need a public health care option. It is despicable that any citizen of this country would not have basic health care.
There is a certain section of the population that thinks that would be a socialist, Muslim, atheist, commie, fascist, nazi thing to do. So we better not, since them scary words.

Quote:
Originally Posted by netbrad View Post
Everyone in this country has basic health care by merely showing up at any clinic or hospital. The issue is paying for those health services. If you believe every citizen should have health care provided by someone else then by all means start up your own health business to provide such services for free, or head down to the closest hospital ER and start writing checks.
The amount people depend on the ED is sad. Here is a quick financial math problem for everyone. What would cost more? A primary care visit ever few months, and prescribe a couple of different heart/diabetic medication OR pay for the emergency transport, emergency open heart surgery, CICU and the other step down units, rehab, and possible lasting effects, PLUS the money lost by not working. THAT is why it makes sense to make sure everyone has insurance to get people in to see their family docs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
I don't think anyone will disagree with this concept.
Sadly, a vocal part of the population does.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2012, 08:51 PM
 
875 posts, read 1,162,834 times
Reputation: 1174
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBojangles View Post
Sorry bud, but you already pay for them. The cost is built in to your paid care. If we get everyone to start paying into the pot, then what you pay will go to your care, and not other peoples.
Unfortunately not everyone will pay into the pot so costs go up across the board.

Quote:
There is a certain section of the population that thinks that would be a socialist, Muslim, atheist, commie, fascist, nazi thing to do. So we better not, since them scary words.
No, there is a certain section of the population that doesn't want to lose their insurance coverage, watch medical providers go out of business (creating shortages) or pay 40% more for coverage. Look at the disaster that is the NHS in England. Doctors have to write prescriptions for water so the nurses keep patients correctly hydrated and they are trying to convince women not to get epidurals to save money. But don't take my word for it, read the last few years of their audits.

Quote:
The amount people depend on the ED is sad. Here is a quick financial math problem for everyone. What would cost more? A primary care visit ever few months, and prescribe a couple of different heart/diabetic medication OR pay for the emergency transport, emergency open heart surgery, CICU and the other step down units, rehab, and possible lasting effects, PLUS the money lost by not working. THAT is why it makes sense to make sure everyone has insurance to get people in to see their family docs.
I agree that the ER should not be used as a primary care physician, but you cannot force people to take care of themselves. Even people with insurance coverage don't see their doctor when they should. Again, if you want everyone to have insurance/health coverage for free then start your own insurance company or write checks to cover someone's premium. You shouldn't need the government to force you to be charitable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2012, 08:55 PM
 
875 posts, read 1,162,834 times
Reputation: 1174
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
No, it isn't. It is entirely relevant.

It is the #1 underlying distortion in what passes for a medical care payment system in the US.
The #2 underlying distortion is the over reliance on "HI policies" for care that has no cause to involve insurance.
I am perfectly happy for my employer to be able to negotiate with insurance companies to get the best rate possible. I am also perfectly happy for said insurance company to negotiate with providers to get the best pricing possible for health services. If you disassociate coverage from employment then costs go up across the board since individuals don't have the power to negotiate prices.

For example, 2 companies ago the insurance provider notified my employer that premiums would go up 12%. My company said "no way" and negotiated it down to a 4% increase ate the cost. I didn't have to pay any extra and we got bonuses that year. So there are advantages to tying employment with insurance coverage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2012, 05:19 AM
 
Location: The Triad
34,092 posts, read 83,000,140 times
Reputation: 43666
Quote:
Originally Posted by netbrad View Post
...individuals don't have the power to negotiate prices.
...in the current set up arrangement.
Some seem to be satisfied with this. I'm not.

Those who benefit from the set up are welcome to feel otherwise...
but don't fool yourself that it's better. Even for you.
Look deeper.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2012, 08:15 AM
PDD
 
Location: The Sand Hills of NC
8,773 posts, read 18,393,566 times
Reputation: 12004
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBojangles View Post
Sorry bud, but you already pay for them. The cost is built in to your paid care. If we get everyone to start paying into the pot, then what you pay will go to your care, and not other peoples.



There is a certain section of the population that thinks that would be a socialist, Muslim, atheist, commie, fascist, nazi thing to do. So we better not, since them scary words.



The amount people depend on the ED is sad. Here is a quick financial math problem for everyone. What would cost more? A primary care visit ever few months, and prescribe a couple of different heart/diabetic medication OR pay for the emergency transport, emergency open heart surgery, CICU and the other step down units, rehab, and possible lasting effects, PLUS the money lost by not working. THAT is why it makes sense to make sure everyone has insurance to get people in to see their family docs.



Sadly, a vocal part of the population does.
Mr BJ we seem to agree but for some reason your saying my reasoning is wrong. Makes no sense in trying to debate with somebody who agrees with you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2012, 08:33 AM
 
Location: The Triad
34,092 posts, read 83,000,140 times
Reputation: 43666
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDD View Post
Mr BJ we seem to agree but for some reason your saying my reasoning is wrong.
Makes no sense in trying to debate with somebody who agrees with you.
In this instance especially...
the HOW of doing something is at least as important as the WHAT of it.
In my view it's even more important.

The HOW of it absolutely warrants debate.
Many, too many, seem to confuse this with being against the idea in total.

Then you can get into defining the depth and breadth aspect, the scope of it all too.
Just exactly where the foul lines for what coverage will cost us what amount might be.
Are there any foul lines at all?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2012, 10:25 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
1,051 posts, read 2,299,127 times
Reputation: 1054
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDD View Post
I'll bet they have an I-Phone, I-Pad and a hand full of lottery tickets every week. Who need insurance when the emergency rooms have to take car of you when your sick or injured?
I bet they don't.

I bet that a lot of them are the millions of just above the poverty line North Carolinians who don't qualify for Medicaid but can't pay for the ungodly costs of insurance, especially if they dare to burden the system with their pre-existing conditions.
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 > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:25 PM.

© 2005-2024, 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