Importance of insurance?

[auditor0007]

Doing the same thing over and over again....or in other words the republicans approach to health care reform.

Now, back to my original question.....what value do healthcare insurance companies provide?

Diligence

Text of H.R.5424 as Introduced in House: Reform Americans Can Afford Act of 2010 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress

your original question: They allow me to go to the doctor with short notice at any time I want for about 20 bucks...if i need a perscription another 20 bucks....god forbid I end up in the ER but at least I know it wont cost more than 500 bucks.

Thats the value they add, peace of mind, for a fee and profit. I'm willing to pay as long as I can choose my level of coverage and insurance provider, are you?

Nice that you can pay. Many can't. And when they see a doctor without insurance, that $20 becomes $100 for them, the prescription another $100.

Here is the thing Maggie. While that $20 becomes $100 to the person who must pay out of pocket, that $100 is much less than the actual cost that the insured person is paying. While the insured person is paying only $20 out of pocket, the total cost is $200 rather than $100 to the person who pays out of pocket. While this doesn't work well for catastophic cases, and insurance is necessary for most to cover major illnesses, we would be much better off paying out of pocket for basic medical care.

 

[GWV5903]

Insurance is important for business?

Have you ever been sued as a business owner? If you could pass legislation that limited the lawyers take to say 10% and place caps, you could drive down the cost of everything.....

Take a minute and find out what group spends more on campaign contributions than anyone else.....

I would have to check the official fact pages on campaign contributions, but I believe the US Chamber of Commerce tops them all. Wouldn't it be nice if their wide range of supporting contributors (thanks to the USSC decision) had the best interests of the working class in mind as they spend their millions campaigning for conservatives and lobbying against anything Democrats try to do, including getting people back to work.

Try Lawyers/Law Firms, #1 for 10 of the last 11 years......

Lawyers / Law Firms: Long-Term Contribution Trends | OpenSecrets

 

[Oddball]

Really? I know you're not asking for intelligent discussion Dude, but rather to start an argument. But I'll humor you anyway.....

Because there is no better option at this point. No public option, no single payer, so to ensure that all americans can get access they had to promise the insurance companies, who are unfortunately very much in control of healthcare still, that if they are to cover preexisting conditions then all people must have insurance in order to help alleviate some of the costs (ie. reduced profits) the insurance companies will have to take on.

What you really mean is that there's no better option that you will accept as better.

You're the one who has accepted the premise that a third-party payer is the best way to pay for medical expenses, not me...That's your problem.

We have to have insurance for the big things. Unless you are a multi-millionaire, you need catastrophic insurance. However, basic medical care would be much cheaper if everyone paid out of pocket. In the cases of those who can't afford even basic care, government could subsidize those in need. We already do this anyway, although in a very inefficient way.

Very simply, all health insurance policies should include a higher deductible. And then instead of allowing all medical procedures to be billed through insurance, make people pay out of pocket and submit their paid bills to their insurance companies so that they can be credited toward their deductible. Instead, we allow the providers and insurers to set the prices of each procedure. On top of that, we are charged outrageous administrative costs that add even more to the cost. If everyone had to pay out of pocket, they would look for the cheapest provider possilbe, or if they chose to pay more, it would be for reasons other than cost. Competition would be much greater and costs would be reduced for most basic medical care.

No argument here...Yet, state must-cover mandates blow that particular model to bits.

Costs are high because of too much gubmint interference, at all levels, not too little.

 

[GWV5903]

Insurance is important for business?

Have you ever been sued as a business owner? If you could pass legislation that limited the lawyers take to say 10% and place caps, you could drive down the cost of everything.....

Take a minute and find out what group spends more on campaign contributions than anyone else.....

I would have to check the official fact pages on campaign contributions, but I believe the US Chamber of Commerce tops them all. Wouldn't it be nice if their wide range of supporting contributors (thanks to the USSC decision) had the best interests of the working class in mind as they spend their millions campaigning for conservatives and lobbying against anything Democrats try to do, including getting people back to work.

Maggie, are you paid buy a Right Wing Group to make Democraps look totally stupid? The highlighted statement of yours is simply amazing, I would have never believed it if I had not seen it with my own eyes......

Do a little homework, the Democrap Party has all the votes they need to do whatever they want.....

The only people/voters who believe it is Bussssssshesssssss or Republicans fault anymore are the same people/voters who if given the chance would vote for Obummer TODAY and admit they did to the whole world.......

Wouldn't you like to be that special person......

 

[Madeline]

What you really mean is that there's no better option that you will accept as better.

You're the one who has accepted the premise that a third-party payer is the best way to pay for medical expenses, not me...That's your problem.

We have to have insurance for the big things. Unless you are a multi-millionaire, you need catastrophic insurance. However, basic medical care would be much cheaper if everyone paid out of pocket. In the cases of those who can't afford even basic care, government could subsidize those in need. We already do this anyway, although in a very inefficient way.

Very simply, all health insurance policies should include a higher deductible. And then instead of allowing all medical procedures to be billed through insurance, make people pay out of pocket and submit their paid bills to their insurance companies so that they can be credited toward their deductible. Instead, we allow the providers and insurers to set the prices of each procedure. On top of that, we are charged outrageous administrative costs that add even more to the cost. If everyone had to pay out of pocket, they would look for the cheapest provider possilbe, or if they chose to pay more, it would be for reasons other than cost. Competition would be much greater and costs would be reduced for most basic medical care.

No argument here...Yet, state must-cover mandates blow that particular model to bits.

Costs are high because of too much gubmint interference, at all levels, not too little.

This is bullshit...complete, utter bullshit. Until the health care law passed, there was little federal legislation on the subject of health insurance. (COBRA, ERISA, etc....but not much of it substantive.) Insurance companies will make money by denying coverage to people who are sick or denying coverage of their injuries or illnesses after they are insured.

Health just is not a risk where the needs of the public can be reconciled with those of the profit-seeking insurance company, and a single payor system is better.

 

[Madeline]

Have you ever been sued as a business owner? If you could pass legislation that limited the lawyers take to say 10% and place caps, you could drive down the cost of everything.....

Take a minute and find out what group spends more on campaign contributions than anyone else.....

I would have to check the official fact pages on campaign contributions, but I believe the US Chamber of Commerce tops them all. Wouldn't it be nice if their wide range of supporting contributors (thanks to the USSC decision) had the best interests of the working class in mind as they spend their millions campaigning for conservatives and lobbying against anything Democrats try to do, including getting people back to work.

Maggie, are you paid buy a Right Wing Group to make Democraps look totally stupid? The highlighted statement of yours is simply amazing, I would have never believed it if I had not seen it with my own eyes......

Do a little homework, the Democrap Party has all the votes they need to do whatever they want.....

The only people/voters who believe it is Bussssssshesssssss or Republicans fault anymore are the same people/voters who if given the chance would vote for Obummer TODAY and admit they did to the whole world.......

Wouldn't you like to be that special person......

GWV5903, this post of yours makes no fucking sense. If you want to drag Maggie off to the woodshed, you'll have to try harder.

 

[GWV5903]

I would have to check the official fact pages on campaign contributions, but I believe the US Chamber of Commerce tops them all. Wouldn't it be nice if their wide range of supporting contributors (thanks to the USSC decision) had the best interests of the working class in mind as they spend their millions campaigning for conservatives and lobbying against anything Democrats try to do, including getting people back to work.

Maggie, are you paid buy a Right Wing Group to make Democraps look totally stupid? The highlighted statement of yours is simply amazing, I would have never believed it if I had not seen it with my own eyes......

Do a little homework, the Democrap Party has all the votes they need to do whatever they want.....

The only people/voters who believe it is Bussssssshesssssss or Republicans fault anymore are the same people/voters who if given the chance would vote for Obummer TODAY and admit they did to the whole world.......

Wouldn't you like to be that special person......

GWV5903, this post of yours makes no fucking sense. If you want to drag Maggie off to the woodshed, you'll have to try harder.

It makes no sense to a Democrap, never has and probably never will, your included in that btw in case you couldn't understand that either....

The woodshed??? I thought is was pretty clear I threw her under the bus, but then again you're probably a Democrap.....

 

[Madeline]

I'm a Republican, you gibbering idiot.

 

[GWV5903]

I would have to check the official fact pages on campaign contributions, but I believe the US Chamber of Commerce tops them all. Wouldn't it be nice if their wide range of supporting contributors (thanks to the USSC decision) had the best interests of the working class in mind as they spend their millions campaigning for conservatives and lobbying against anything Democrats try to do, including getting people back to work.

Maggie, are you paid buy a Right Wing Group to make Democraps look totally stupid? The highlighted statement of yours is simply amazing, I would have never believed it if I had not seen it with my own eyes......

Do a little homework, the Democrap Party has all the votes they need to do whatever they want.....

The only people/voters who believe it is Bussssssshesssssss or Republicans fault anymore are the same people/voters who if given the chance would vote for Obummer TODAY and admit they did to the whole world.......

Wouldn't you like to be that special person......

GWV5903, this post of yours makes no fucking sense. If you want to drag Maggie off to the woodshed, you'll have to try harder.

Does Maggie need your protection???

 

[Madeline]

Nobody needs "protection"...this is an internet message board. But if you cannot communicate better what your ideas are, your contribution here might be marginal.

 

[GWV5903]

We have to have insurance for the big things. Unless you are a multi-millionaire, you need catastrophic insurance. However, basic medical care would be much cheaper if everyone paid out of pocket. In the cases of those who can't afford even basic care, government could subsidize those in need. We already do this anyway, although in a very inefficient way.

Very simply, all health insurance policies should include a higher deductible. And then instead of allowing all medical procedures to be billed through insurance, make people pay out of pocket and submit their paid bills to their insurance companies so that they can be credited toward their deductible. Instead, we allow the providers and insurers to set the prices of each procedure. On top of that, we are charged outrageous administrative costs that add even more to the cost. If everyone had to pay out of pocket, they would look for the cheapest provider possilbe, or if they chose to pay more, it would be for reasons other than cost. Competition would be much greater and costs would be reduced for most basic medical care.

No argument here...Yet, state must-cover mandates blow that particular model to bits.

Costs are high because of too much gubmint interference, at all levels, not too little.

This is bullshit...complete, utter bullshit. Until the health care law passed, there was little federal legislation on the subject of health insurance. (COBRA, ERISA, etc....but not much of it substantive.) Insurance companies will make money by denying coverage to people who are sick or denying coverage of their injuries or illnesses after they are insured.

No, the bullshit is we let the Lawyers take us to the cleaners, until you have serious Tort Reform, we will never have a system that is even close to being good....

Health just is not a risk where the needs of the public can be reconciled with those of the profit-seeking insurance company, and a single payor system is better.

You reform the rules, you don't take it over.....

 

[Madeline]

"Tort reform" is a slogan for businesses who want the court house doors closed on plaintiffs after they have been injured. It is rare for a health insurance company to be sued for wrongfully denying coverage, and even rarer for them to lose. Lawyers are not responsible for runaway health care costs or for the impasse' between insurance companies and their insureds on this line of business.

 

[GWV5903]

Nobody needs "protection"...this is an internet message board. But if you cannot communicate better what your ideas are, your contribution here might be marginal.

And you contribute what exactly??? I'll be waiting

 

[Madeline]

Do you have a point to make, GWV5903? About health insurance, I mean.

 

[GWV5903]

"Tort reform" is a slogan for businesses who want the court house doors closed on plaintiffs after they have been injured. It is rare for a health insurance company to be sued for wrongfully denying coverage, and even rarer for them to lose. Lawyers are not responsible for runaway health care costs or for the impasse' between insurance companies and their insureds on this line of business.

Is a slogan? Are you really this stupid? You have no first hand knowledge with lawsuit abuse, if you did you would know your a dumb ass on the subject....

Your a waste of time, until you study the effects, take a fucking hike....

Philip K. Howard: Why Medical Malpractice Reform Is Off Limits - WSJ.com

 

[Madeline]

Malpractice insurance rates are not driving the crisis in health care costs. And frankly, med mal rates should be addressed by reducing the incidence of malpractice, not by closing the courthouse doors.

Your analysis is foolish, superficial and uninformed.

 

[GWV5903]

Do you have a point to make, GWV5903? About health insurance, I mean.

Yes I do, you did get one thing right, it is in your signature line, you're a self described "BITCH".....

 

[Madeline]

Uh huh.

 

[GWV5903]

Malpractice insurance rates are not driving the crisis in health care costs. And frankly, med mal rates should be addressed by reducing the incidence of malpractice, not by closing the courthouse doors.

Your analysis is foolish, superficial and uninformed.

And you have facts to support this?!?!?!?! I'll be waiting

No one has demanded the court house doors be closed....

BTW let us know how you measure the effects of defensive medicine, defensive manufacturing, defensive Workman's comp claims, etc.... I'll be waiting

 

[Oddball]

We have to have insurance for the big things. Unless you are a multi-millionaire, you need catastrophic insurance. However, basic medical care would be much cheaper if everyone paid out of pocket. In the cases of those who can't afford even basic care, government could subsidize those in need. We already do this anyway, although in a very inefficient way.

Very simply, all health insurance policies should include a higher deductible. And then instead of allowing all medical procedures to be billed through insurance, make people pay out of pocket and submit their paid bills to their insurance companies so that they can be credited toward their deductible. Instead, we allow the providers and insurers to set the prices of each procedure. On top of that, we are charged outrageous administrative costs that add even more to the cost. If everyone had to pay out of pocket, they would look for the cheapest provider possilbe, or if they chose to pay more, it would be for reasons other than cost. Competition would be much greater and costs would be reduced for most basic medical care.

No argument here...Yet, state must-cover mandates blow that particular model to bits.

Costs are high because of too much gubmint interference, at all levels, not too little.

This is bullshit...complete, utter bullshit. Until the health care law passed, there was little federal legislation on the subject of health insurance. (COBRA, ERISA, etc....but not much of it substantive.) Insurance companies will make money by denying coverage to people who are sick or denying coverage of their injuries or illnesses after they are insured.

Health just is not a risk where the needs of the public can be reconciled with those of the profit-seeking insurance company, and a single payor system is better.

You obviously know nothing of which you speak....Nothing new there.

Medicare, Medicaid, the myriad of various and sundry state programs, COBRA and the in-state-only quasi-monopolies with their must-cover mandates, are all clear examples of gubmint interference with the marketplace.

I've got a news flash for you...The most basic laws of economics demonstrate that those impositions drive costs up, not down.