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.
High regulation and laws for the insurance industry.
Non-profit insurance organizations, like it use to be, when insurance was actually a good thing.
Instead of the doctors dealing with insurance, the consumer needs to be the one dealing with them. Let the consumer become a heathcare shopper. Bring competition to the doctors, not insurance rackets, that are immune to competition to a degree.
When was the last time you knew what a surgery was going to cost, until you got the itemized bill afterward, from the insurance saying, what they paid for and what they didn't?
I don't have dental insurance and I know before the procedure what it is going to cost.
I know what my veterinarian is going to charge me before my dogs are taken care of.
Not all doctors are the same.
It cost ¼ to pay cash, instead of having insurance pay.
The office staff doesn't know what my office visit will cost without insurance, but I do know the fees they're attempting to charge cash paying patients are at least 3x's what they bill out to insurance companies because they've obliged themselves to a bargain with the devil. Fees have been documented as high as 300% more. Really funny math, but somehow not many folks are laughing because it's killing them.
If health care doesn't get fixed I'm all for kicking the chair out from under the whole crooked system by abolishing insurance and having medicaid dictate fees across the board. Have a civilian review board red stamp away any indication of $15 asprin.
Not for profit insurance sounds like a good place to start. Corrupt corporatist capitalism is the worst of all possible worlds.
yes it would drive the cost down. Big companies like Aetna have to set up different insurance programs for each state. Currently Aetna of Oklahoma is cheaper and rated better then Aetna of Texas. It makes no sense for small business not be able to shop across state lines for the best deal for their workers. As people we buy Auto insurance across state lines, we buy life insurance across state lines. We do so to shop for the best deals for us. yet our small and big business can not do so.
As people we buy Auto insurance across state lines,
Yes, but each state has requirements that auto insurance companies have to follow. The Republican plan for health insurance has no such requirements, as far as I know. It would be more similar to how credit card companies operate, where they can set up shop in any state and then sell their product to consumers in any other state.
yes it would drive the cost down. Big companies like Aetna have to set up different insurance programs for each state. Currently Aetna of Oklahoma is cheaper and rated better then Aetna of Texas. It makes no sense for small business not be able to shop across state lines for the best deal for their workers. As people we buy Auto insurance across state lines, we buy life insurance across state lines. We do so to shop for the best deals for us. yet our small and big business can not do so.
Really coulds you tell us how much cheaper Aetna of Oklahoma is than Aetna of Texas? What is the difference in the two policies? Who rates Aetna of Oklahoma better.
Just for your information they do not sell the same auto insurance across state lines. As a matter of fact they do not even sell the same auto insurance policy across zip codes. Each policy is written as to the type of roads, distance the auto will be driven, amount of car thefts in that area, type of car, age of car, age of driver and credit score of driver. So if you are trying to claim it is a burden to write a health policy by state you'll have to explain why so many for auto insurance.
When credit card companies were deregulated and allowed to compete across state lines, they just moved to the states that allowed them the fewest restrictions. Are credit card customers better off now than they were before the companies were deregulated? I don't think so.
I imagine the same thing would happen with health insurance companies if they were allowed to compete across state lines. It would be a race to the bottom in terms of the benefits they offer. I'm not against deregulation, but I also don't think it'll help much.
No, it won't...I can't understand why some people think it will. It just means we would have more choice as to which companty will screw us...
Don't you find it odd that in every other industry, new technology drives the cost down? (Cost of computers, cell phones, etc.) Why would new technology that provides better services at a lower cost make the price RISE?
Ironically, in the early 20th century the biggest complaint by the AMA was that the cost was to LOW and doctors weren't making enough. So legislation was introduced throughout the 20th century to reduce competition and increase barriers of entry into the medical market. It's been one big regulation mess ever since.
You're kidding, right?
It's pretty obvious. New technology in the medical system means that there are huge capital costs for the new devices and they must be supported. In addition, there are new tests and procedures that can be prescribed for conditions that would have been treated without them before. It's not a matter of technology reducing the cost of doing the same thing, as in other areas.
When credit card companies were deregulated and allowed to compete across state lines, they just moved to the states that allowed them the fewest restrictions. Are credit card customers better off now than they were before the companies were deregulated? I don't think so.
I imagine the same thing would happen with health insurance companies if they were allowed to compete across state lines. It would be a race to the bottom in terms of the benefits they offer. I'm not against deregulation, but I also don't think it'll help much.
You're absolutely correct.
Of course, the Republicans, who are arguing for interstate insurance sales, have no interest in the welfare of the customers of the insurance companies. To them, the only relevant question is the bottom line for the companies.
The point is that deregulation of the credit card industry didn't help the consumer, as far as I know. If health insurance is deregulated, it seems likely that the result will be the same: Good for the companies, with little or no benefit to consumers.
Exactly. Companies who have group policies will seek out the states with the fewest regulations and poorest enforcement to buy policies and the little guys who work for those companies will be getting the short end of the stick. It's not about competition driving standards up, it's about fewer regulations sending group policy buyers racing toward the bottom.
Insurance companies already do business in many different states. In some cases, they have slightly different names in each state they serve, e.g. Blue Cross of (insert name of state). If you have ever read your insurance policy, you will have noted that there are sections that say "for residents of (insert name(s) of state). This is a sham proposal. The purpose is to do what Wayland says.
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.
