UHC Ceo assassinated

[beej]

Competition is usually good. It's hard for me to see how that would work though. Insurance should be stronger when more people are included.

When you look at home insurance and car insurance there is lots of competition. Insurance brokers often sell a dozen different types. When state farm jacked up my rates several years ago, we went shopping and found an insurance cooperative called Auto-Owners their prices were 1/3 of what I was paying through State farm and the policy holders are the share holders.  So that is one idea.

[Del.]

Competition is usually good. It's hard for me to see how that would work though. Insurance should be stronger when more people are included.

I think the Medicare advantage plan should be disposed of too. Traditional medicare is the best bang for the buck.

That's why we need new senators and congress people.

I'm not talking about those over 65. I'm talking about the entire country. An Advantage plan would be fine for a young person with no health issues. Basically I'm talking about Universal healthcare for everyone.

[gcode]

If I were to offer any kind of solution at all, it would be to promote more competition among Health insurers.

Tort reform is also desperately needed.
The premiums doctors and hospitals pay for liability insurance are a large part of the insane prices
we pay for healthcare.
The threat of getting sued is also a big driver of decisions made about whether or not to perform a needed surgery.
Many fields on medicine are chronically understaffed as the risks of lawsuits are too high.

[Smit]

When you look at home insurance and car insurance there is lots of competition. Insurance brokers often sell a dozen different types. When state farm jacked up my rates several years ago, we went shopping and found an insurance cooperative called Auto-Owners their prices were 1/3 of what I was paying through State farm and the policy holders are the share holders.  So that is one idea.

That does sound hopeful. Were there any restrictions on the people who were allowed to buy in?

I'm not talking about those over 65. I'm talking about the entire country. An Advantage plan would be fine for a young person with no health issues. Basically I'm talking about Universal healthcare for everyone.

Yeah I got that. But traditional medicare would be fine for young people too. Medicare advantage plans aren't a good deal for our country as a whole.

'It was stunning': Bipartisan anger aimed at Medicare Advantage care denials

Insurers accused of $50B fraud connected to Medicare Advantage plans

[YoDoug]

I have some friends and family that have started using Medi-share programs and they mostly seem to like them. not quite the same as insurance but close.

We looked for a Medishare type provider, but we came across two issues. The first was mental health services. Since most of those types of providers are Christian based they really limit what type of mental health services they cover. The second and bigger issue was they have long limits on pre-existing conditions. A lot of them cap payout for pre-existing conditions to as low as $100k for up to five years. With the ongoing health issues my wife has a single hospital stay could go beyond those payouts.

[beej]

That does sound hopeful. Were there any restrictions on the people who were allowed to buy in?

I'm not aware of any. It's possible that there were restrictions and my broker already knew we qualified and never brought them up.

[YoDoug]

That's why we need new senators and congress people.

I agree but people like you keep voting for the same politicians that created Obamacare and the mess we are in.

[Del.]

That does sound hopeful. Were there any restrictions on the people who were allowed to buy in?
Yeah I got that. But traditional medicare would be fine for young people too. Medicare advantage plans aren't a good deal for our country as a whole.

'It was stunning': Bipartisan anger aimed at Medicare Advantage care denials

Insurers accused of $50B fraud connected to Medicare Advantage plans

Oh I agree with you that Traditional Medicare is the best bang for your buck. Advantage plans restrict your choices for treatment and must be approved. If me and the wife can be all but 100% covered for $600/month then why can't everyone. Even less with a different plan. It's a no brainer to me.

[Smit]

I agree but people like you keep voting for the same politicians that created Obamacare and the mess we are in.

So much for trying to have a rational discussion with Doug! 

The main problem with "Obamacare" is they tried to work with the insurance companies because people like YoDoug were defending our healthcare as the best in the world! 

That's socialism, screams Doug! 

[YoDoug]

So much for trying to have a rational discussions with Doug! 

The main problem with "Obamacare" is they tried to work with the insurance companies because people like YoDoug were defending our healthcare as the best in the world! 

That's socialism, screams Doug! 

LOL, my defense or in-defense of our healthcare system had no impact on Obamacare. It was 100% crafted by the politicians you voted for by way of their big donor insurance companies.

[Smit]

Obtuse or willfully obtuse?

I'm thinking it's willful. 

[beej]

Oh I agree with you that Traditional Medicare is the best bang for your buck. Advantage plans restrict your choices for treatment and must be approved. If me and the wife can be all but 100% covered for $600/month then why can't everyone. Even less with a different plan. It's a no brainer to me.

because the entire population is paying the difference through taxes between the $600 that you are paying and what it actually costs. And even with that, medicare is still bleeding funds.

[Del.]

because the entire population is paying the difference through taxes between the $600 that you are paying and what it actually costs. And even with that, medicare is still bleeding funds.

I'm confident the math could be worked out.

[RobertELee]

I'm confident the math could be worked out.

Even though the Pentagon can't pass a budget audit and the country is $36trillion in debt?

[Smit]

because the entire population is paying the difference through taxes between the $600 that you are paying and what it actually costs. And even with that, medicare is still bleeding funds.

Ya know, that is what we have right now. Everybody who is paying a premium is paying for the sick people who need care. That's what insurance is and does. And they need to be profitable too.

One way money is called taxes, the other way money is called premiums. $10 in taxes = $10 in premiums.

I would suggest if we were to devote the amount of money we currently spend on healthcare to Medicare for all it would be a better system just by cutting the insurance companies out.

In truth I think we'd end up spending less by a healthy margin.

Of course we'd then have to focus our attention on reform for healthcare costs like the $200 aspirins you get in hospitals, and tort reforms.

No easy fix for a complex problem.

If everybody is dug in to "we can't change because" we're going to always get more of the same shit we're all unhappy with.

I think the answer to this complex problem isn't going to happen with insurance companies in the mix.