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.
HHS warns of double-digit spike in health premiums - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100218/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_insurance_rates - broken link)
I am still in disbelief that there are many who want to keep insurance companies around.
The reason why many want to keep things as they are is because many people are divided in how they are insured in this country. Many work for large companies that belong to large groups getting great rates, same for government employees, they get good rates too since states regulate insurance you don't want to **** them off. Also the insurance industry is sure to give a sweet heart deal to the fed. You have the young who many don't much think about insurance unless its car insurance. You have most people who pay premiums who are healthy and think everything is just fine because many are health and seldom go to the docs thus seldem put the premiums to the test. It's when you test or pester the system, people start to see the light.
My dear Purple, the company who made your computer has a higher profit margin than the healthcare companies. The company whose browser you surf the web on earns five times the margin as the insurance companies.
I think the hybrid system in France is the best option. It'll never pass though, until people are dying from inadequate care, we'll never fix the system. I realize there are some dying now, but not in the massive numbers needed for public opinion to change.
The reason why many want to keep things as they are is because many people are divided in how they are insured in this country. Many work for large companies that belong to large groups getting great rates, same for government employees, they get good rates too since states regulate insurance you don't want to **** them off. Also the insurance industry is sure to give a sweet heart deal to the fed. You have the young who many don't much think about insurance unless its car insurance. You have most people who pay premiums who are healthy and think everything is just fine because many are health and seldom go to the docs thus seldem put the premiums to the test. It's when you test or pester the system, people start to see the light.
I had to stop talking to an old friend because she is opposed to universal health care yet she's covered by Tricare (the health insurance those in the Army receive). She isn't in the Army, her husband is.
I think the hybrid system in France is the best option. It'll never pass though, until people are dying from inadequate care, we'll never fix the system. I realize there are some dying now, but not in the massive numbers needed for public opinion to change.
Many people are feeling the pain now and the numbers grow each month. The 5 largest insurance companies are requesting between 18%-57% increase in premiums as we chat.
The pain is not physical, the pain will be felt in their pocket books instead while people pass away.
Could somebody explain the business case behind insuring somebody with preconditions?? If I have $100,000 to invest in a health insurance company I am sure as hell not going to take on sick patients if I have a choice. Not terminally sick patients at least.
I wouldn't be against some kind of program that helps out those who cannot pay for catastrohpic problems. But having the gobment take care of EVERYTHING from colds to cancer will never work.
I'm one of those weird people that thinks health care shouldn't be a business.
We shouldn't even have health insurance companies to begin with.
Health insurance is different from other insurance in a number of ways but one thing all insurance has in common is the concept that many people pay premiums and few people make claims. Reverse that and you are screwed. But in the meantime, premiums rise very significantly. We have an aging, rather unhealthy population, high unemployment and fewer employers offering health care. The current system cannot be saved just on simple business principles alone.
Health insurance companies are now charging more and more in order to cover fewer and fewer people. I'm no business major, but that doesn't sound like a winning strategy.
Meanwhile, it's not health care costs that are rising - it's the number of uninsured people who require care from the system regardless of insurance coverage or ability to pay. Hospitals have to cover these costs or close. They raise the "health care costs" to the insurance companies in order to pay for our failed public policy. It's clearly unsustainable.
Passing a bill that props up these dinosaurs is doomed to expensive failure.
You're saying instead of a private insurance company approving payment, the government will be approving payment.
Neither one is telling you what type of medical care you can have....they are telling the hospital what type of medical care they are willing to pay for.
Your spin on the situation is weak. But I can see how it would work on some people.
You really see a difference between them telling me and them telling the hospital? Really, I mean really there is a difference to you? Come on now that is weak. Please explain what the difference is. If they tell the hospital they will only pay for 75% of a c-section or they tell me they will only pay for 75% of a c-section what is the difference? They ARE in the end telling me what they will cover which IS telling me what care I can have.
You can spin it all you want but at the end of the day the government WILL determine what they will cover which WILL dictate what I will have done because as it has been stated so many times I will not be able to afford it out of my own pocket. So YES the government WILL be deciding what medical care I have.
There is a large and vigorous private sector in health services. The Commonwealth Government considers that strong private sector involvement in health services provision and financing is essential to the viability of the Australian health system.
For this reason the Commonwealth Government provides a 30 per cent subsidy to individuals who acquire private health insurance and has introduced additional arrangements to foster lifelong participation in private health insurance.
I've just started reading it but it doesn't sound that different from Medicare:
Quote:
The aim of the national health care funding system is to give universal access to health
care while allowing choice for individuals through a substantial private sector
involvement in delivery and financing. The major part of the national health care system is called ‘Medicare’. Medicare provides high quality health care which is both affordable and accessible to all Australians, often provided free of charge at the point of care. It is financed largely from general taxation revenue, which includes a Medicare levy based on a person’s taxable income. Commonwealth funding for Medicare is mainly provided as:
• subsidies for prescribed medicines (with a safety net providing free medicines for
the chronically ill) and free or subsidised treatment by practitioners such as
doctors, participating optometrists or dentists (specified services only);
• substantial grants to State and Territory governments to contribute to the costs of
providing access to public hospitals at no cost to patients; and
• specific purpose grants to State/Territory governments and other bodies.
I'm not a big fan of the government subsidizing private for-profit health insurance.
I have heard from a few Australians on the web that they love the system and that's great.
I don't think any one country with universal health care holds all the answers.
I like the German system, the British system, the French system, and the system in Taiwan.
You're saying instead of a private insurance company approving payment, the government will be approving payment.
Neither one is telling you what type of medical care you can have....they are telling the hospital what type of medical care they are willing to pay for.
You're playing the semantics game.
You can go to an insurance approved hospital for an insurance approved reason and things out of the insurance approved line of control can happen. When something unforeseen does happen and you are dealing with doctors who are not approved by your insurance company...that's when the hospital admin comes and rushes you to sign paperwork that states you will be responsible for anything your insurance company will not cover. Don't think it will change when the government is running the show.
But, and at the same time, what does the gov't HC package say they will approve? Is it akin to what someone who has top of the line private insurance gets? No waiting lists like most of the socialized HC in EU, "You're old so get in line for chemo b/c we've got many younger people who need it before you?". Lost a family member in the Netherlands b/c of this.
Quote:
Your spin on the situation is weak. But I can see how it would work on some people.
It's not weak. Thinking a government insurance plan, that everyone is going to have to partake in down the road (the 5 year plan) is going to be a good thing, is weak.
What does anyone who supports a single-payer system know and can put out in layman's terms while explaining the EXACT provisions set forth in this wonderful plan?
Please help all of us who gave up somewhere around page 500.... b/c having to refer to pg 237 section 22.543, while reading pg 2 section 5.4, and then only finding out that pg 237 section 22.543 is contingent on something else happening on page 700 section 50.2.555 (and it goes on, and on and on)...it was so full of HOLES no one could figure out what the heck is really intended?
But if you do know, please share.
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.
