This man is a hero....

quote:

I would be curious to know how many people who don't have healthcare....

There are four groups of people in the 45-50M uninsured ...

1) 18-25 year olds choosing not to be insured
2) People making over 75K choosing not to be insured
3) People eligible for Medcaid and don't know it
4) People above the line of eligibility for Medicaid with affordability issues

I sell benefit packges for small businesses and individuals. One guy told me he couldn't afford health insurance because he had just invested 75K into remodeling his house. I sold an insurance policy to a 24 year old businessman for $56 a month. The plan allowed for a free annual physical. Yes he had a 5K deductible on everything else. But he wasn't going to become a 100K burden on society. Hospitals will negotiate a reduction of charges and a payment play for high deductibles to get keep them off their bad debt.

The best model would be one where the insurance industry is not overhauled. Government doesn't know how to run a business. What needs to be done is find a way to help the fourth category I listed. Tort reform would lower medical liability policy costs and therefore lower doctor and hospital costs. One of my dad's friends retired from being a surgeon when his annual liability insurance hit 800K (not a misprint, 800K).

Massachusetts implemented a plan to help subsidize those with affordability issues. The hoped to get the money from taxing businesses. The tax revenue was one third of expected. The stare robbed Medicaid to support the program. The hospitals are now suing the state over underpayment for Medicaid patients.

Now here's a question: Should the person who takes care of their health pay the same insurance premium as a person who does not take care of their health? Please keep catastrophic (cancer, etc) situations out of the response. The simple question is should a 6 feet, 180 pound fit person who works out all the time pay the same premium as a 6 foot, 300 pound coach potato who's statistically a huge health risk? In some states they do.

I have a high deductible HSA. It keeps my premiums down. I fund a tax deductible HSA account to cover the possibility of needing to pay the deductible for a medical situation. If I don't use the money it rolls over to the next year (don't confuse it with an MSA). Then my costs are lower as I don't keep funding the account beyond the deductible.

A normal HMO guaranteed issue insurance policy for my age in my state would be about $550 per month. It's about $475 for a health qualified HMO plan. I pay $350 for my HSA. My deductible is only $1200 annually. I had to qualify based on reasonably good health. Even if I got sick every year I make out. You do the math (policies vary from state to state). My HSA plan is also a PPO, not an HMO.

I can also use my tax deductible HSA money for uncovered medical expenses for my immediate family, such as the 40% not covered for braces for my kids. The HSA money can also be used for Long Term Care insurance premiums.

75% of what I sell are HSA's It's a way to keep health insurance costs down. A lot of insurance people don't like to propose them because it cuts into commissions since the premiums are lower. Their commissions are less (zero) when I steal their accounts.

RJM,

I appreciate your post because I think these are some of the areas that should be addressed rather than a complete overhaul of the healthcare system. Yet, somehow our politicians have tried to re-define the problem...

With this so called healthcare debate I feel as if I'm trapped in George Orwell's book, 1984, where if I don't believe as Big Brother wants me to believe I must be having 'improper thoughts'.

No one is saying that this issue isn't a huge problem for the country. But, how to solve it is what's being discussed here. Why can't I buy insurance from a company outside of Illinois? That's called competition. I'm not happy with lifetime benefit limits. Pre-existing conditions, sometimes of an almost laughable nature need to end. We can all agree on these. This is common sense.

In fact Stage Dad, I am healthy...and blessed...however, I have had some issues. My wife has substantial health issues and I have struggled to make it work. And I am positive there are many people who struggle with health care coverage.

But does this make me a bad and uncaring person if I think the debate is more about government control and manipulation and not about people? Well, if you listen to those who want this government healthcare system then I am an evil uncaring person who just 'want people to die and get over with it'. I am not letting my empathy about my fellow citizens cloud my thinking like what many politicians want. They don't want you to ask questions and criticize this government grab of our money. Having the government oversee this issue will hurt more than it will help.

Coach you are talking to a happy guy with government run Universal health care. I was making a very good middle class income, nice home and all the toys. I am now semi retired and in a couple months my drug plan will cost me $2.00 a month. I get the best of health care and see specialists without cost.
Many of the pro BB and hockey players I know own condos here just to secure their health care.

quote:

Coach you are talking to a happy guy with government run Universal health care.

So YOU'RE the one. I heard there was one of you out there. Talk about one in a million.

I know one or two others.

As I mentioned before BHD, it's your system and you like it...I don't begrudge you that, but it is a system destined here to be plagued with unacceptable levels of governmental control that Americans loathe. I'm not alone with these beliefs.

I don't expect you to fully understand what I'm about to explain...not because you are not a smart guy, but because it is difficult for someone who has not lived in and been an integral part of American society to fully comprehend. Just like I am having difficulty with understanding why your Canadian healthcare system with all its issues is so great and why Americans should subject themselves to it.

I am an American through and through. I trace my roots back to the 1600's. My forefathers fought the British in our Revolutionary war and again in 1812 to keep an oppresive and heavily regulated form of government out of our lives. We fought one another in our civil war...well...my point is that my very blood, culture and family history has been ingrained with the American concepts of limited government. History is repleat with governments that have over-reached their proper authority and have ultimately failed as a result. My forefathers died trying to keep government in its proper place. As an American I am fiercely independent and self-sufficient. I have been raised to believe in myself and that I can accomplish anything I set my mind too through discipline and hard work. And yes, I am an arorgant American who lives in the greatest country in the world.

It took a special group of men at just the right time in history to come up with our governmental concept of a Republic...a limited form of government that has served this country very well. Except for the occasional populist attempts to circumvent and undermine the foundational tenets, it has survived.

I think this is a serious moment in American history where certain politicians within this government seem to think they can curry favor with the populace if they define this so called debate as an attempt to help the weak and less fortunate within society. This is further from the truth as is north from south. It is an attempt, pure and simple to control every aspect of healthcare for Americans and pump more taxes into its coffers. I don't buy for a minute that Nancy Peolosi or any other like minded politician, democrat or republican, really cares about the 46 million uninsured. They only care for power, influence, money and how they can remain in office indefinately on the American tax dollar. They are using the American tax dollar to buy votes to stay in office. Not becaue they are somehow the worst people in the world, but because they are human. The founding fathers of our government understood human nature...as Lord Acton said, 'Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.'

This so called healthcare debate is the largest governmental grab for power in the existence of this country...by far. That is unacceptable. It flies in the face of why this country was formed and has nothing to do with healthcare, but with everything Americans loathe about intrusive and abusive government.

Since you have lived in a different form of government than I, you may be satisfied with it, that's okay. But don't expect freedom loving Americans who believe in limited government to take that pill or to sit still while power hungry politicians attempt to burden us with disengenuous manipulative statements about caring more for people than me or anyone else and then will go forward rationing care as they see fit.

Coach interesting post.
1st I know a lot about American politics and government. Here we study in depth the US, British and Canadian systems. Do you ?
I also studied the US British and Canadian law and legal systems while at The Inns of Court in London England. So I have a good understanding of those aspects of both countries.
Our government is a multi party system compared to your two party system. The difference is that our governing party has to cater to the other political parties to stay in power. Right now their is a minority government that has to rely on support from the other parties to pass their budgets and legislation. If the other parties don't the governing party will have to step down and call an election.
This difference although it sounds strange actually allows other political views to addressed in legislation. It is very rare to see a party get a majority vote and to do as they like.
Canada has been accused of being to free and too liberal.
The war of 1812 was fought here as well. It was fought all the way from the Great Lakes down to the Gulf of Mexico. We also fought against the British and the US. The British were trying to control their Colonies.
Just to be clear the new powers are emerging in the East. The US owes so much
to the Chinese it is scary.
I also have numerous relatives in the US. They find very little difference than living here. They are obviously very well off and don't have to worry about health care. They were all transfered to their jobs in the US. One just bought a million dollar home in San Jose and she is 35 years old. I understand that ain't much of a home there. Her 1st home was $500,000.00 that she got in a lottery bidding war.
To me I don't understand the power grab hysteria in the US. Ranks right up there with the boogie man.

.

I am assuming from your last sentence BHD that your interpretation of the debate down here is strictly about healthcare and not power.

I can understand your viewpoint given the system of governance in Canada. Perhaps an universal healthcare program was much more easily accepted in Canada because your political system is structured such that one party can not amass all of the power.

For conservatives (not necessarily Republicans) here in the US the push for healthcare insurance reform is more about collecting and keeping power than it is about people's health. RJM summed up the situation well and Coach couldn't have laid out the conservative perspective any better.

There are very few people here in the US that think nothing should be done to reform our heathcare insurance system. It is very apparent that the course that our current administration and his Democratic party is taking is not comprehensive and is not inclusive of other points of view. Quite the opposite of what apparently worked so well for Canada according to your reports.

I guess you have to be a citizen here to understand the dynamics involved in this grab for power. There was certainly enough yelling and screaming from the left during the last administration concerning our foreign policy and our war strategy. Did you think the boogie man was sitting on a high perch then?


.

Actually Canada was dragged into Universal Health care kicking and screaming as well.
It was brought in by a socialistic party called NDP. It was introduced gradually and is now a remarkable system.
Our system is full of issues in regards to political power grabbing. I can't stand the partisan politics played out in the media. I don't vote political party but vote according to policy. I tend to be very Conservative . Our immigration policies and lack of punishment for crime drive me crazy.
The health care system is embraced by all parties and is a non issue in the power struggle.
I don't know if you noticed but our banks were not greatly affected by the economic woes. We had a 4 month slow down and now our economy is back on a terror. Record housing sales even with high unemployment. There have been no foreclosure increases due to the economy. I expected a real long turn down and it just didn't happen. Everywhere you look there is construction and new projects funded by the deficit spending by the government. We have run surpluses for the last 8 or so years but the economic stimulus was an necessary evil under these circumstances.

.

"It was brought in by a socialistic party called NDP. It was introduced gradually and is now a remarkable system.

I am really glad to read that your system is now working well for you and your fellow Canadians.

As you know, if this administration would have had it's way, our system would have been reformed months ago, exactly to their liking, with no questions asked. Not a neck unbroken at that speed! And that is wrong!

I like the Canadian approach to reform much better. From your reports it was more inclusive and more attention paid to the outcome. Congratulations to Canada.

Hopefully we will get the reform which we need, but it must come aboot through an inclusive, contemplative, and comprehensive approach at a more deliberate pace. Makes sense, eh?




.

BHD,

I'm glad Canada is doing well...the loonie has never done so well against the USD. Now some Canadians won't have to drive across the border to buy their beer in the US. That's good for your econonmy.

Canada is a beautiful and wonderful country...no doubt about it. I particularly like western Canada, but then again I am from the west and like everything west better...but, that's my opinion. I also really like Canadians...especially to drink beer with! They are just a great people whom we not only share a common border with but have a lot in common as well sharing some important history.

But what I think you fail to understand is how we cherish how this government was formed and are reluctant to see it changed. Limited government with the powers derived from the individual is unique within civilization. We don't get our rights from our government, but are God given. There is more wriiten about what our government cannot do than what it can do in our Constitution. What politicians often fail to understand is that they swear an oath to uphold and protect the constitution not subvert it. I've said it many times now in my post and attempted to explain it, but this so called debate is not about healthcare as much as it is about governmental control over areas it has no right too as per its own rules.

However, this is not stopping these careless and ruthless politicians from exploiting people who need healthcare. It is shameful to see such people being used so that 'Big Brother' can take care of them and assert new authority over individuals' lives.

Obviously, you disagree with my concerns and as you put it people like me are afraid of the 'Boogie Man'. I take this as you are implying that my concerns are unjustified and irrational. This is the response I typically get when talking to those who do not live or understand the tenets of how this government was formed and is operated. My concerns do not make sense to you because you fail to truly understand that this government was formed under a tyrany and our founding fathers clearly wanted to prevent from occurring again. They understood human nature and governmental oppression and set out to devise a government that prevented such abuses. Show me another government on the face of this planet where the powers derived are from those of the individual. It does not exist...not even in Canada.

Well, I think I'm done here with this issue and I hope you have not taken offense at my opinions as I have not taken offense at yours. But please do me a favor and don't bring up gun control...LOL!!!!

Coach I love guns. I especially love hand guns. My S&W model 39 9mm is a beauty. I also have a black powder Army Navy Colt.
What I don't see is how the UHS gives government more power over my rights. The health care is run by the province and everyone gets the best health care. There have been some some politicians mess with the funding which led to the problems you hear about but believe me those politicians have bit the dust. You can't mess with our UHS or you are history.
I also love Americans even the ones in NY. I am 15 mins from the border. In college most of my friends were Americans. I have relatives all over the US. My Dads sister lives in Marblehead MA and my Mothers sister lived in Atlanta. We are actually very similar in our demands from those who govern us.
As far as the beer it is all good. The high dollar is actually hurting our economy. The border is lined up with shoppers heading to the US. Our exports are more expensive and that is going to hurt. Tourism in Niagara Falls and Ontario is way down.

By the way my cardio specialist just drove by in his new Lambogini. He also has 2 Ferraris.

.
If our administration gets their way this is the only Lamborghini my cardiologist will be able to afford...




...and the Ferraris? Although nice, they don't quite convey the sense of wealth and lofty social standing that your doctor's Ferraris pack!








.

Did you know that in Arizona I can walk around with one of these strapped to my hip?




...I love it!

.

This will get you into a lot of trouble in Illinois...






.

quote:

No one is saying that this issue isn't a huge problem for the country.

It's not as huge of an issue as a particular political party and it's media minions have made it out to be. It's been made out to be a big problem for the means of taking government control to fix it.

There are issues. But, most people like their health insurance. The issues vary from state to state given insurance is regulated at the state level. The issues are ....

1) People above the Medicaid line affording insurance
2) Access to insurance for unhealthy people (guaranteed issue).
3) Inflationary costs of health insurance
4) Tort reform
5) Illegal aliens

As for the illegals, let's face it, regardless of political affiliation it's not humane to deny medical attention to a person in a desperate medical situation. So where is the money going to come from for this? And I'd rather have illegals purchasing insurance than showing up at hospitals without it. Their presence in the US is another debate so from the sake of the insurance debate I'll accept they are here.

It doesn't take a complete overhaul of the system to fix these issues.

One person mentioned being able to purchase insurance from a company in another state. This will not help you save money. If a company is forced to sell insurance in another state the actuaries (financial people who analyze data to help structure costs) will analyze the health data in your state and come up with insurance costs that will be close to all the insurance companies in your area who have aleady done these calculations. Even now insurance rates vary within a state based on calculated variables for each region of the state.

Insurance companies do not rake in money hand over fist. The state insurance commissions require each insurance company to hold in reserve X dollars which is usually three times expected claims. It keeps health insurers from going under and not being able to pay claims. The percentage profit margin for insurance companies is small. However, they do handle large amounts of money. Insurance companies make money reinvesting their large amounts of money. Every large corporation in any industry has portfolio managers reinvesting their money.

In my little town I see one of the perpexling issues of health care. We have ONE hospital.
That ONE hospital runs full page ads in the newspaper every day.
I took my kid there to get 3 stitches in his chin.
They billed my insurance company $852. I paid $603 out of pocket because of course the insurance company is not going to pay $852 for 3 (or 23) stitches.

I've got a story and so does everyone else. That is what is maddening about health care.

2 weeks ago I had a plastic surgeon slice and dice my neck to remove a possible skin cancer. No idea what it cost . I know the surgeon on a 1st name basis.

maybe you guys should leave things as they are but have people who can't afford the insurance to have the government run a secondary insurance through existing insurers and the government pay for the insurance. The people who could apply and demonstrate the inability to pay could avail themselves of the services. Could be run under the existing welfare structure.

quote:

Insurance companies do not rake in money hand over fist.

No, maybe not, but their CEO's sure do.
And it's also been stated that the health insurance companies are spending $1.40 million a day to defeat this bill.
I wonder why. Also, check out some former senators and congressmen who were once in bed with these companies and are now lobbyist and working for them.
What a racket.

CEO's pay
Cigna $25,839,777.00
Coventry Health Care $14,869,823.00
Health Net $3,686,230.00
Humana $10,312,557.00
United Health Group $13,164,529.00
Well Point $9,094,271.00

.

That is a good common sense suggestion BHD. Those are the type of ideas that need to be included and explored.

Your doctor...the one who was doing all of the slicing and dicing...does his name happen to be Dr. Ron Popeil...as seen on TV?




.

quote:

CEO's pay
Cigna $25,839,777.00
Coventry Health Care $14,869,823.00
Health Net $3,686,230.00
Humana $10,312,557.00
United Health Group $13,164,529.00
Well Point $9,094,271.00

Workinghard, of course they are spending money to defeat it. Tell me an industry that wants to be run by the gov't? Banking and Auto industies clearly don't like it. Gov't won't run it you say? If they set up a public option to care for those that can't get coverage elsewhere, it sets a low water mark to contend with and higher end policies/coverage will obviously drift into because of cost. That won't happen? Have you checked your company's healthcare coverage lately? Every year new lower cost options pop up with more restricted coverage and better plan go away because they are too expensive for the company to continue to offer. If the real issue was coverage for those that don't have it, why not simply expand Medicaid? If it's industry/coverage reform, why not address it as RJM mentioned with tort reform, pre-existing conditions, etc? There's a bigger agenda at work here...healthcare is a trojan horse.

Before you conclude those CEOs are overpaid as a group, highly paid CEOs are not unique to healthcare. These 6 guys were EACH paid more than your healthcare top 6 in total. CEO pay is not an indication of a need for healthcare reform.

1 Lawrence J Ellison, Oracle, $556.98m
2 Ray R Irani, Occidental Petroleum, $222.64m
3 John B Hess, Hess, $154.58m
4 Michael D Watford, Ultra Petroleum, $116.93m
5 Mark G Papa, EOG Resources, $90.47m
6 William R Berkley, WR Berkley, $87.485m

quote:

Your doctor...the one who was doing all of the slicing and dicing...does his name happen to be Dr. Ron Popeil...as seen on TV?

The TV guy is better.

Husker-

I'm not defending the government option, but I hope that you don't think for a minute that the example you provided is the only reason the industry is fighting it. If you think that the CEO's pay is not part of the fighting, well....

And yes Husker, just like the banking industry where thousands of people are being harmed financially, CEO pay is part of the reason (not sole) that reform is needed in the health industry. Thousands of people are hurting both financially and physically.

Clearly CEO's pay IS part of it. A non-gov't run entity head will always get paid more than a gov't run entity head. Watch what these latest executive pay restrictions are going to do to AIG, Citi and the like. No top exec can be paid more than $200k in TOTAL comp? What qualified exec in their right mind would take a top job in one of those companies for that? That exec pay czar is going to far and is going to put the companies they bailed out, out of business. There's a gov't run business for you. It's all about power and control.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/2...mpensation/index.htm

I agree with you Husker for the most part.

But back to topic at hand "Healthcare Costs"

I think we both agree something needs to be done.

quote:

I think we both agree something needs to be done.

Yes we do ... and it sure would be nice if we had two parties negotiating an option together for all rather than one issuing litmus tests, throwing down mandates because they think they can force their big daddy approach through congress.

Give and take from both sides of the aisle.
Both have faults and are refusing to compromise to the others satisfaction.

Someone come up with healthcare we all can afford and I will be happy, regardless what party claims victory!!

1. Remove the barriers that prevent the purchase of plans accross state line.
2. Remove the Numerous Mandates that States Impose on Insurers
3. Tort Reform

The reason the insurance companies want to defeat this bill is the public option could drive them out of business. The government could provide a great public option and price it in a manner where it could run in the red. It's the way government thinks. It's not good in the long run for the country for any government program to run in the red. Corporations can't operate this way.

If the public option is appealing in the short run it will drive the insurance industry out of business. In the long run the government won't be able to run the programs that deep into the red and have to cut back on the plan's coverage. The public option is not a good long run solution other than to have the government take over the industry. If the insurance industry goes under I have two questions ...

1) Who likes the idea of the only insurance option being the one provided by the government?

2) What will it do to the economy to drive under an industry that's 16% of the economy? It's just another case of the government taking over the business sector.

Did you know in the current bill the DMV has been determined to be one public agency where health insurance can be obtained. When was the last time you came out of the DMV smiling when you had a problem?

Is anyone aware the taxes to pay for heathcare start in 2010 even though the plan won't be implemented until 2013. That's a three year head start on taxes. What happens when the three years of excess taxes run out? Answer: The program runs in the red.

For the poster who mentioned purchasing insurance across state lines, it's an irrelevant situation. There are plenty of insurance companies who sell in multiple states. They adjust the rates based on the health statistics in each state. In fact rates are adjusted within states by health data. If you live in state A you will not get the rates available in state B.

The Medicaid and Medicare programs are in horrible financial condition and fraught with fraud. Is there a majic wand that will be waived to make these problems disappear if the government gets in the health care business? How about fixing these two problems and few important health insurance issues.

Next: Is it an entitlement to be provided housing? food? Where does it stop?