BTS and I haven't had health insurance since November of 2008. We've been paying for my cancer updates every 6 months in cash. Last year I only had to pay 2/3 of the cost in cash. This year I only had to pay 50% of the cost. So my question is "What the freak!!!" It occurs to me that if an insurance company is involved... the price is jacked up by 30-50% to cover the cost of people you have to hire to file and keep up with insurance payments AND the discount insurance companies cost the docs by subscribing to them.
There does need to be some kind of reform.
health care
-
nvalleyvee
- Posts: 5191
- Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:57 am
health care
The growth of knowledge depends entirely on disagreement..........Karl R. Popper
health care
nvalleyvee;1287554 wrote:
There does need to be some kind of reform.
Thats a start.
There does need to be some kind of reform.
Thats a start.
I AM AWESOME MAN
health care
nvalleyvee;1287554 wrote: BTS and I haven't had health insurance since November of 2008. We've been paying for my cancer updates every 6 months in cash. Last year I only had to pay 2/3 of the cost in cash. This year I only had to pay 50% of the cost. So my question is "What the freak!!!" It occurs to me that if an insurance company is involved... the price is jacked up by 30-50% to cover the cost of people you have to hire to file and keep up with insurance payments AND the discount insurance companies cost the docs by subscribing to them.
There does need to be some kind of reform.Insurance companies need to be taken out the equation, They are a middle man thats makes money essentially skimming off the top for their own profit.
Insurance itself is a legal form of betting. The company is giving you odds that you won't become vitally ill and you are betting you will, thats the reason they have to screen out so many things as preexisting conditions and misinformation on application , its a way out for them. Life insurance companies try to do the same thing - that's why they like it when smokers lie on insurance policy applications saying they don't smoke, the first thing an insurance company does after a client passes away is make sure the lungs have been checked.
In health insurance, if there was one pool where we all put our money, and administrative costs could be controlled, and profit off the savings pool were not permitted, our health care needs could be met. But what I've described is a single payer system, and too many people have been scared into thinking that thats the bogeyman.
At my age of 53 If I were to be covered under my wifes employers policy it would cost me around $300.00 per month. Had I been doing that since she began working at that job (7 years) I would have paid in $25,200.00 for basically no service. Over those 84 months I've probably paid out perhaps $3000.00 in health costs. Now I wouldn't mind paying the money if I know others such as yourself were benefiting health wise with it and it was going to be there when and if I ever needed it but I sure don't like the idea of it being pure profit for insurance companies while shutting others out because they can't meet the costs of belonging to the group. Incidentally, I still would have paid a portion of the $3,000.00 anyway with co payments and deductibles as its set up now.
My belief is that once the anxiety is taken out the system and all were treated equally health care wise, our behavior would mature and we would become healthier as a country, plus we would be better educated by our health care professionals as we would see more of them on a regular basis.
I'm sorry for your illness - have you begun taking plenty of vitamin d3?
There does need to be some kind of reform.Insurance companies need to be taken out the equation, They are a middle man thats makes money essentially skimming off the top for their own profit.
Insurance itself is a legal form of betting. The company is giving you odds that you won't become vitally ill and you are betting you will, thats the reason they have to screen out so many things as preexisting conditions and misinformation on application , its a way out for them. Life insurance companies try to do the same thing - that's why they like it when smokers lie on insurance policy applications saying they don't smoke, the first thing an insurance company does after a client passes away is make sure the lungs have been checked.
In health insurance, if there was one pool where we all put our money, and administrative costs could be controlled, and profit off the savings pool were not permitted, our health care needs could be met. But what I've described is a single payer system, and too many people have been scared into thinking that thats the bogeyman.
At my age of 53 If I were to be covered under my wifes employers policy it would cost me around $300.00 per month. Had I been doing that since she began working at that job (7 years) I would have paid in $25,200.00 for basically no service. Over those 84 months I've probably paid out perhaps $3000.00 in health costs. Now I wouldn't mind paying the money if I know others such as yourself were benefiting health wise with it and it was going to be there when and if I ever needed it but I sure don't like the idea of it being pure profit for insurance companies while shutting others out because they can't meet the costs of belonging to the group. Incidentally, I still would have paid a portion of the $3,000.00 anyway with co payments and deductibles as its set up now.
My belief is that once the anxiety is taken out the system and all were treated equally health care wise, our behavior would mature and we would become healthier as a country, plus we would be better educated by our health care professionals as we would see more of them on a regular basis.
I'm sorry for your illness - have you begun taking plenty of vitamin d3?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
health care
nvalleyvee;1287554 wrote: BTS and I haven't had health insurance since November of 2008. We've been paying for my cancer updates every 6 months in cash. Last year I only had to pay 2/3 of the cost in cash. This year I only had to pay 50% of the cost. So my question is "What the freak!!!" It occurs to me that if an insurance company is involved... the price is jacked up by 30-50% to cover the cost of people you have to hire to file and keep up with insurance payments AND the discount insurance companies cost the docs by subscribing to them.
There does need to be some kind of reform.
Since you have no insurance coverage and paid a reduced cost in cash isn't it possible that the difference is paid by those of us that do have insurance? My wife and I have had medical costs in excess of of $250,000 covered by Medicare and Supplemental Insurance for cancer related treatment. Medicare is not known for it's generous reimbursement to medical providers. We would have been hard pressed to pay in cash.
There does need to be some kind of reform.
Since you have no insurance coverage and paid a reduced cost in cash isn't it possible that the difference is paid by those of us that do have insurance? My wife and I have had medical costs in excess of of $250,000 covered by Medicare and Supplemental Insurance for cancer related treatment. Medicare is not known for it's generous reimbursement to medical providers. We would have been hard pressed to pay in cash.
health care
Ahso!;1287565 wrote: Insurance companies need to be taken out the equation, They are a middle man thats makes money essentially skimming off the top for their own profit.
Insurance itself is a legal form of betting. The company is giving you odds that you won't become vitally ill and you are betting you will, thats the reason they have to screen out so many things as preexisting conditions and misinformation on application , its a way out for them. Life insurance companies try to do the same thing - that's why they like it when smokers lie on insurance policy applications saying they don't smoke, the first thing an insurance company does after a client passes away is make sure the lungs have been checked.
In health insurance, if there was one pool where we all put our money, and administrative costs could be controlled, and profit off the savings pool were not permitted, our health care needs could be met. But what I've described is a single payer system, and too many people have been scared into thinking that thats the bogeyman.
At my age of 53 If I were to be covered under my wifes employers policy it would cost me around $300.00 per month. Had I been doing that since she began working at that job (7 years) I would have paid in $25,200.00 for basically no service. Over those 84 months I've probably paid out perhaps $3000.00 in health costs. Now I wouldn't mind paying the money if I know others such as yourself were benefiting health wise with it and it was going to be there when and if I ever needed it but I sure don't like the idea of it being pure profit for insurance companies while shutting others out because they can't meet the costs of belonging to the group. Incidentally, I still would have paid a portion of the $3,000.00 anyway with co payments and deductibles as its set up now.
Ahso------------You really do not understand the nature of insurance. The $25,000 plus that you would have paid is a drop in the bucket when it comes to medical costs. The odds are, that before you die, your medical costs will have been far in excess of any premiums that you would have paid. Because you have not had major cost of illness does not mean you will not. I am in pretty good shape and have had medical costs (discounted) of $50,000 for just a few days of services. Having just completed my 2008 Income Taxes I can say that my total medical costs for 2008 including Medicare premiums, Supplemental Insurance Premiums, co pays for drugs and medical providers was $11,750. By the way----Isn't what we pay for our Medicare a form of Insurance Premium and instead of the government making a profit like a insurance company they lose money on fraud, waste and inefficiency.
Insurance itself is a legal form of betting. The company is giving you odds that you won't become vitally ill and you are betting you will, thats the reason they have to screen out so many things as preexisting conditions and misinformation on application , its a way out for them. Life insurance companies try to do the same thing - that's why they like it when smokers lie on insurance policy applications saying they don't smoke, the first thing an insurance company does after a client passes away is make sure the lungs have been checked.
In health insurance, if there was one pool where we all put our money, and administrative costs could be controlled, and profit off the savings pool were not permitted, our health care needs could be met. But what I've described is a single payer system, and too many people have been scared into thinking that thats the bogeyman.
At my age of 53 If I were to be covered under my wifes employers policy it would cost me around $300.00 per month. Had I been doing that since she began working at that job (7 years) I would have paid in $25,200.00 for basically no service. Over those 84 months I've probably paid out perhaps $3000.00 in health costs. Now I wouldn't mind paying the money if I know others such as yourself were benefiting health wise with it and it was going to be there when and if I ever needed it but I sure don't like the idea of it being pure profit for insurance companies while shutting others out because they can't meet the costs of belonging to the group. Incidentally, I still would have paid a portion of the $3,000.00 anyway with co payments and deductibles as its set up now.
Ahso------------You really do not understand the nature of insurance. The $25,000 plus that you would have paid is a drop in the bucket when it comes to medical costs. The odds are, that before you die, your medical costs will have been far in excess of any premiums that you would have paid. Because you have not had major cost of illness does not mean you will not. I am in pretty good shape and have had medical costs (discounted) of $50,000 for just a few days of services. Having just completed my 2008 Income Taxes I can say that my total medical costs for 2008 including Medicare premiums, Supplemental Insurance Premiums, co pays for drugs and medical providers was $11,750. By the way----Isn't what we pay for our Medicare a form of Insurance Premium and instead of the government making a profit like a insurance company they lose money on fraud, waste and inefficiency.
health care
Lon;1287625 wrote: Ahso------------You really do not understand the nature of insurance. The $25,000 plus that you would have paid is a drop in the bucket when it comes to medical costs. The odds are, that before you die, your medical costs will have been far in excess of any premiums that you would have paid. Because you have not had major cost of illness does not mean you will not. I am in pretty good shape and have had medical costs (discounted) of $50,000 for just a few days of services. Having just completed my 2008 Income Taxes I can say that my total medical costs for 2008 including Medicare premiums, Supplemental Insurance Premiums, co pays for drugs and medical providers was $11,750. By the way----Isn't what we pay for our Medicare a form of Insurance Premium and instead of the government making a profit like a insurance company they lose money on fraud, waste and inefficiency.I don't think i misunderstand it at all, I used to sell it. My explanation though is rather raw because I don't imply insurance is worth what we pay for it, none of it. But in some cases as in driving its a law to carry it, and for business' its necessary to keep it on workers because thats an investmen.
I agree that waste, fraud and abuse occurs in Medicare and Medicaid about as much as it occurs in private insurance. But I would also say that there has been a concerted effort over the years beginning with the Reagan administration to appoint people into government positions that do not believe in government and preferred private sector instead and has slowly eroded governments effectiveness.
When I was young, government worked pretty well because people wanted it to. It all comes down to people. The same people whom work in the private sector would work in the government sector and do a quality job, it all boils down to attitude. No the government won't make some of us rich, but it can function quite well if we want it to. Look at our military, its the best in the world. Why? It's a government run entity. Its so good because no one has sabotaged it from the inside like almost all other government entities.
I agree that waste, fraud and abuse occurs in Medicare and Medicaid about as much as it occurs in private insurance. But I would also say that there has been a concerted effort over the years beginning with the Reagan administration to appoint people into government positions that do not believe in government and preferred private sector instead and has slowly eroded governments effectiveness.
When I was young, government worked pretty well because people wanted it to. It all comes down to people. The same people whom work in the private sector would work in the government sector and do a quality job, it all boils down to attitude. No the government won't make some of us rich, but it can function quite well if we want it to. Look at our military, its the best in the world. Why? It's a government run entity. Its so good because no one has sabotaged it from the inside like almost all other government entities.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
health care
Ahso!;1287631 wrote:
I agree that waste, fraud and abuse occurs in Medicare and Medicaid about as much as it occurs in private insurance.
Look at our military, its the best in the world. Why? It's a government run entity. Its so good because no one has sabotaged it from the inside like almost all other government entities.
Waste and fraud with private insurance??? If that were the case there would be no profit. C'mon.
Military good because it's government run??? You mean over paying for planes, tanks, etc. No fraud waste or inefficiency? Let's get real here.
A privately run military of mercenaries could and would do a better job given the same resources as the government and they would make a profit to boot.
I agree that waste, fraud and abuse occurs in Medicare and Medicaid about as much as it occurs in private insurance.
Look at our military, its the best in the world. Why? It's a government run entity. Its so good because no one has sabotaged it from the inside like almost all other government entities.
Waste and fraud with private insurance??? If that were the case there would be no profit. C'mon.
Military good because it's government run??? You mean over paying for planes, tanks, etc. No fraud waste or inefficiency? Let's get real here.
A privately run military of mercenaries could and would do a better job given the same resources as the government and they would make a profit to boot.
health care
Lon;1287632 wrote: Waste and fraud with private insurance??? If that were the case there would be no profit. C'mon.
Military good because it's government run??? You mean over paying for planes, tanks, etc. No fraud waste or inefficiency? Let's get real here.
A privately run military of mercenaries could and would do a better job given the same resources as the government and they would make a profit to boot.Gee, Lon, its odd to see hostility coming from you.
You're saying theres is no waste, fraud and abuse in the private sector? Thats rather naive. There is profit because private insurance companies cover it up with higher premiums, filtering out clients and don't have to release that sort of information like government agencies do. And no one is really looking to exploit it because too many have investments in it. That would be biting the hand that feeds.
Are you saying our military is not the class of the world? I'd like to see which military you believe out shines ours. BTW - I'm not sure whose posts you're reading but I didn't say its the best because its government run, I said its the best in spite of being government run. Sorry for the confusion on that. Private mercenaries would probably do well to in this type of engagement but I doubt they would do as well in a conventional war. But, the idea would be to save the taxpayer costs by renting armies, no? My point is that given the money and dedication in any agency or business such as is exemplified in the military, they all could run as well.
All the over payments of arsenal is cost of doing business when you want the results we've gotten. Being taken advantage of is required for premium service in an economy such as ours.
Military good because it's government run??? You mean over paying for planes, tanks, etc. No fraud waste or inefficiency? Let's get real here.
A privately run military of mercenaries could and would do a better job given the same resources as the government and they would make a profit to boot.Gee, Lon, its odd to see hostility coming from you.
You're saying theres is no waste, fraud and abuse in the private sector? Thats rather naive. There is profit because private insurance companies cover it up with higher premiums, filtering out clients and don't have to release that sort of information like government agencies do. And no one is really looking to exploit it because too many have investments in it. That would be biting the hand that feeds.
Are you saying our military is not the class of the world? I'd like to see which military you believe out shines ours. BTW - I'm not sure whose posts you're reading but I didn't say its the best because its government run, I said its the best in spite of being government run. Sorry for the confusion on that. Private mercenaries would probably do well to in this type of engagement but I doubt they would do as well in a conventional war. But, the idea would be to save the taxpayer costs by renting armies, no? My point is that given the money and dedication in any agency or business such as is exemplified in the military, they all could run as well.
All the over payments of arsenal is cost of doing business when you want the results we've gotten. Being taken advantage of is required for premium service in an economy such as ours.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
health care
Ahso!;1287675 wrote: Gee, Lon, its odd to see hostility coming from you.
You're saying theres is no waste, fraud and abuse in the private sector? Thats rather naive. There is profit because private insurance companies cover it up with higher premiums, filtering out clients and don't have to release that sort of information like government agencies do. And no one is really looking to exploit it because too many have investments in it. That would be biting the hand that feeds.
Are you saying our military is not the class of the world? I'd like to see which military you believe out shines ours. BTW - I'm not sure whose posts you're reading but I didn't say its the best because its government run, I said its the best in spite of being government run. Sorry for the confusion on that. Private mercenaries would probably do well to in this type of engagement but I doubt they would do as well in a conventional war. But, the idea would be to save the taxpayer costs by renting armies, no? My point is that given the money and dedication in any agency or business such as is exemplified in the military, they all could run as well.
All the over payments of arsenal is cost of doing business when you want the results we've gotten. Being taken advantage of is required for premium service in an economy such as ours.
Hostile?? Me?? I am a genuine LOVABLE PUSSYCAT
I am not comparing our military with any other, that's not the issue. It's better only because we spend more $$$$ on it than any one else. China is starting to outspend us and will soon exceed us in military capability, but they can afford it, they got the bucks. There is no comparison between government and private industry inefficiency. Private industry will go belly up if they are inefficient for very long. The government however will go on forever irrespective of inefficiency.
I could see a company like GOOGLE run a military. They can probably even afford to.
You're saying theres is no waste, fraud and abuse in the private sector? Thats rather naive. There is profit because private insurance companies cover it up with higher premiums, filtering out clients and don't have to release that sort of information like government agencies do. And no one is really looking to exploit it because too many have investments in it. That would be biting the hand that feeds.
Are you saying our military is not the class of the world? I'd like to see which military you believe out shines ours. BTW - I'm not sure whose posts you're reading but I didn't say its the best because its government run, I said its the best in spite of being government run. Sorry for the confusion on that. Private mercenaries would probably do well to in this type of engagement but I doubt they would do as well in a conventional war. But, the idea would be to save the taxpayer costs by renting armies, no? My point is that given the money and dedication in any agency or business such as is exemplified in the military, they all could run as well.
All the over payments of arsenal is cost of doing business when you want the results we've gotten. Being taken advantage of is required for premium service in an economy such as ours.
Hostile?? Me?? I am a genuine LOVABLE PUSSYCAT
I am not comparing our military with any other, that's not the issue. It's better only because we spend more $$$$ on it than any one else. China is starting to outspend us and will soon exceed us in military capability, but they can afford it, they got the bucks. There is no comparison between government and private industry inefficiency. Private industry will go belly up if they are inefficient for very long. The government however will go on forever irrespective of inefficiency.
I could see a company like GOOGLE run a military. They can probably even afford to.
health care
Lon;1287686 wrote: Hostile?? Me?? I am a genuine LOVABLE PUSSYCAT
I am not comparing our military with any other, that's not the issue. It's better only because we spend more $$$$ on it than any one else. China is starting to outspend us and will soon exceed us in military capability, but they can afford it, they got the bucks. There is no comparison between government and private industry inefficiency. Private industry will go belly up if they are inefficient for very long. The government however will go on forever irrespective of inefficiency.
I could see a company like GOOGLE run a military. They can probably even afford to.But thats just not accurate. When industries such as banking and insurance are mismanaged the government bails them out. Also, the government insures government military contractors will not go belly up by overpaying for supplies and services, thats the same as subsidizing.
I do agree that one reason our military is as good as it is due to money spent, but we also have very dedicated people running it, would you disagree?
I am not comparing our military with any other, that's not the issue. It's better only because we spend more $$$$ on it than any one else. China is starting to outspend us and will soon exceed us in military capability, but they can afford it, they got the bucks. There is no comparison between government and private industry inefficiency. Private industry will go belly up if they are inefficient for very long. The government however will go on forever irrespective of inefficiency.
I could see a company like GOOGLE run a military. They can probably even afford to.But thats just not accurate. When industries such as banking and insurance are mismanaged the government bails them out. Also, the government insures government military contractors will not go belly up by overpaying for supplies and services, thats the same as subsidizing.
I do agree that one reason our military is as good as it is due to money spent, but we also have very dedicated people running it, would you disagree?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
health care
Ahso!;1287689 wrote: But thats just not accurate. When industries such as banking and insurance are mismanaged the government bails them out. Also, the government insures government military contractors will not go belly up by overpaying for supplies and services, thats the same as subsidizing.
I
Sorry---I am accurate
You are of course referring to the recent bailouts------here's just a very small list of failed companies that received no bailout.
Plus----the government insures military contractors because they are dealing with the military which is a government agency---if the contractors were dealing with a private corporation do you think the corporation would bail them out-----Your arguments are pretty weak.
1995
Barings Bank
Bugatti Automobili SpA [note 5]
Carolco Pictures
Jamesway
Rexon
Simtek
Tooton's Photography
1996
AC Cars
Chieftain Products
Escom
Fokker
Mickey Thompson Entertainment Group
Technos Japan Corporation
Theatre Royal, Hanley[note 6][29]
Venturi Automobiles
1997
Bre-X
Canada Games Company
Debbie Reynolds' Hollywood Hotel and Casino[14]
GameTek
Lechmere
Nissan Mutual Life Insurance
Q-Zar
Spectre Supersport[30]
Smoking Car Productions
Tseng Labs
1998
Boyds Wheels[31][32][note 7][33]
JT Storage
Long-Term Capital Management
Maria's Bakery[34]
Ripspeed[note 8]
SyQuest Technology
And here's even more for your perusal.
List of business failures - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I
Sorry---I am accurate
You are of course referring to the recent bailouts------here's just a very small list of failed companies that received no bailout.
Plus----the government insures military contractors because they are dealing with the military which is a government agency---if the contractors were dealing with a private corporation do you think the corporation would bail them out-----Your arguments are pretty weak.
1995
Barings Bank
Bugatti Automobili SpA [note 5]
Carolco Pictures
Jamesway
Rexon
Simtek
Tooton's Photography
1996
AC Cars
Chieftain Products
Escom
Fokker
Mickey Thompson Entertainment Group
Technos Japan Corporation
Theatre Royal, Hanley[note 6][29]
Venturi Automobiles
1997
Bre-X
Canada Games Company
Debbie Reynolds' Hollywood Hotel and Casino[14]
GameTek
Lechmere
Nissan Mutual Life Insurance
Q-Zar
Spectre Supersport[30]
Smoking Car Productions
Tseng Labs
1998
Boyds Wheels[31][32][note 7][33]
JT Storage
Long-Term Capital Management
Maria's Bakery[34]
Ripspeed[note 8]
SyQuest Technology
And here's even more for your perusal.
List of business failures - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
health care
True, but they weren't deemed vital enough. I never meant to say the government keeps all companies afloat, only some of the biggest in order to assure industry viability. I can mention off the top of my head:
The savings and loan bailout.
several bailouts or no/low interest loans to:
Air Lines
Automotive manufacturing
Take over of pensions in some industries
And of course, the FDIC insurance program. No private insurance company will take that one off the governments hands, will they!
Are you saying you've never heard of corporate welfare, or is it that you just don't believe it?
The savings and loan bailout.
several bailouts or no/low interest loans to:
Air Lines
Automotive manufacturing
Take over of pensions in some industries
And of course, the FDIC insurance program. No private insurance company will take that one off the governments hands, will they!
Are you saying you've never heard of corporate welfare, or is it that you just don't believe it?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
health care
Lon;1287686 wrote: I am a genuine LOVABLE PUSSYCAT
Ive always thought so.
Ive always thought so.
I AM AWESOME MAN