National Healthcare - Not As Bad a you think

Free Fall
Auctions

Specials
Auctions

QuickBuy
Auctions

Newly Added
Auctions

Ending Soon
Auctions

Welcome Guest

Forum Terms & Conditions | My Topics

jackconrad
Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter

12 years ago

I hate to admit it but other than subsidies we cant afford and forcing people to have it it's actually a good concept that the Media has bashed without ever really looking at how it works.

A - Your still dealing with private insurance companies

B Everybody qualifies

C There are plenty of alternatives if you are healthy

D it will actually make it easier for small businesses to offer insurance

The numbers are not bad espeially for people out of work and it's better than paying 1200 bucks a month to Cobra because if you let it go you are not healthy enough to get insurance,,

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your CigarBid Forums forum account or Register a new forum account

TheSmokensip
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

A - Your still dealing with private insurance companies

B Everybody qualifies

C There are plenty of alternatives if you are healthy

D it will actually make it easier for small businesses to offer insurance

jackconrad wrote:

:-k Almost sounds to good to be true.

Edited by user 12 years ago | Reason: Not specified

Lou Sanis
Connoisseur

12 years ago

Many components were at one time republican ideas. I sort of wish Bush had done it lol.

Taps86
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

jackconrad wrote:

=d> =d> =d>

Homebrew
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

jackconrad wrote:

I agree. Though I qualify for subsidies, so I can actually afford insurance now, even with my pre existing condition.

Dave (A.K.A. Homebrew)

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

other than subsidies we cant afford and forcing people to have it it's actually a good concept that the Media has bashed without ever really looking at how it works.

jackconrad wrote:

The subsidies to insurance companies and tax credits to individuals is the "Affordable" part of the name ACA.

Forcing people to have it was one of the most important provisions because it forces young healthy people to buy into it so their premiums can be used towards older and/or sicker people.

Take those two components out and you killed the while thing.

ZRX1200
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

And usher in single payer because real competition is gone and big insurance won!

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

Under ACA health insurance companies basically became the same as electric utilities.

In exchange for a huge increase in volume of insurance premiums, the insurance companies agreed to a profit cap (in some states) but also a guaranteed profit. They now make their money more off volume that managing the cost of healthcare. If healthcare costs double due to greater access and the elimination of yearly caps and pre-existing conditions, they insurance companies double their premiums and still get their guaranteed profit.

Electric utilities have a monopoly over a service area and their rates are controlled by a Public Utilities Commission in each state to give them a guaranteed profit.

bloody spaniard
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

And usher in single payer because real competition is gone and big insurance won!

ZRX1200 wrote:

I tend to think you're right- a glorified Medicaid of sorts. Seems like lots of small insurance companies are opting out of the "exchanges" or whatever the hell they call 'em.

rfenst
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

#10

What are the medical expenses currently being paid by society for charitable write-offs, Medicaid and Medicare for those who are uninsured and seek primary and non-emergency care from hospital ERs because they cannot afford insurance?

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

#11

rfenst wrote:

98.2 million USD

stogiefan
Enthusiast

12 years ago

#12

The ACA still doesn't hit on the growing costs of healthcare. The subsidies only give the appearance that health insurance is more affordable. After all it is the taxpayers that fund the government and ultimately these subsidies. Costs will continue to go up because the patient (healthcare consumer) will continue to over utilize insurance which distorts the cost. Basic healthcare services and regular screenings and procedures shouldn't be something we use insurance to cover. These are things that should be paid out of pocket. The reason people can't afford to pay for it out of pocket today is because of those that have insurance and use insurance to pay for their services. Doctors don't have to list prices and compete with other offices because consumers don't care. They just walk in with their $20 copay and price isn't a concern. I understand most people couldn't afford cancer treatments and other catastrophic care. This is what insurance should be for. Premiums would be lower because claims would be paid to a much smaller number of people. Not everyone is going to have cancer or a preexisting condition requiring constant medical attention.

Edited by user 12 years ago | Reason: Not specified

dstieger
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

#13

The ACA still doesn't hit on the growing costs of healthcare.

..... Doctors don't have to list prices and compete with other offices because consumers don't care. They just walk in with their $20 copay and price isn't a concern.

stogiefan wrote:

Bingo!

WTH is wrong when NOBODY is talking about the cost of care or the way the 'system' has made it absolutely impossible to control, much less compare costs. We're f'd because we can't even have a conversation about what the problems might really be.

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

#14

Who cares about controlling the cost of healthcare. The insurance companies now get their 15% profit on the volume of throughput.

They used to have a vested interest in controlling costs but we didn't like that they did things like max caps, pre-existing conditions denial, and higher rates for women than men to pay for pregnancy.

teedubbya
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

#15

Cost of care is high on the list and always has been. I work with it every day.

As for not listing prices etc.... I spent the better part of a decade negotiating hospital and physician contracts and while joe consumer may not be aware, the actual pricing has changed considerably and the competition is occuring in the insurance industry based on volume vs. pricing vs. network composition. Provider reimbursment has undergone a squeeze for many years and continues to, not to mention the utilization end (readmissions etc.).

The growing cost of care is right in the middle of the crosshairs. Not solved, and I'm no fan of OCare, but to suggest no one is focusing on costs is incorrect in my opinion.

teedubbya
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

#16

HockeyDad wrote:

Yea they will just charge higher premiums to take care of the pass through and consumers will not choose the cheaper competitor.

Remember when folks thought competition actually worked?

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

#17

Yea they will just charge higher premiums to take care of the pass through and consumers will not choose the cheaper competitor.

Remember when folks thought competition actually worked?

teedubbya wrote:

Prices I've seen so far seem to be almost identical between companies.

teedubbya
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

#18

The industry is moving (and has been for a long time) from pay for production to pay for performance.

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

#19

The industry is moving (and has been for a long time) from pay for production to pay for performance.

teedubbya wrote:

Is that why we were told to hate the insurance companies and their high profits?

teedubbya
Herf-A-Holic

12 years ago

#20

Prices I've seen so far seem to be almost identical between companies.

HockeyDad wrote:

Does that prove they no longer care about costs and are jacking premiums up or the opposite?

Users browsing this topic

Important Information: