Advice and Support from Thousands of Users Just Like You

Politics Left? Right? Liberal? Conservative? How does politics and the social values you hold affect dating and relationships?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
dito's Avatar

Veteran

Join Date: Dec 2008

Posts: 1,150

See profile

bigfincat wrote :
With Connecticut having one of the largest concentration of insurance companies in the country, the competition has very little effect. You can go out & shop around but will find little difference with each charging more yearly for less service.

I think that you overestimate the willingness for any company to reduce its pricing. Even with growing profits it is very rare for a company to not accept the extra profit. They often do not pass savings onto their clients.

You say that government involvement is corporatism but that would not equate to a change at all then. Health care is that now & would be that after any bill is passed.

I can also tell you that a doctor wanting more patients is NOT a good thing in health care. It is very bad as I have seen offices that will never turn down new patients.

They cannot handle the volume that they currently have & the only thing that more volume accomplishes is less care.

I have seen them take on an obscene amount of newcomers while being unwilling to spend the money to hire more people to handle such volume. They don't mind if their is no personal involvement with the patient or if the see you for 5 minutes & never return your phone calls.
They are separate businesses, aye?

But if they can make more profits by volume why not lower prices?

Exactly and it will get worse. What do you think a mandate to buy insurance will do? That's right, more money to insurance companies and they wont be forced to lower their rates.

Bad doctors go under and good ones prosper.



- November 6th, 2009, 08:06 am
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#41   Reply With Quote
Rand_011's Avatar

Enthusiast

Join Date: Jan 2008

Posts: 779

See profile

imbricated wrote :
Hi Rand,

It was my understanding that the State only allowed two companies to provide independent insurance back when I dropped mine: Blue Cross and Oxford. Mysteriously, their premiums were within $5 of each other. There are about half a dozen now and there are hundreds of dollars difference in premiums. Of course, none are remotely affordable, though the premiums have dropped a bit over the past six months (along with what they buy, no doubt). These are all recent developments... I wonder what inspired them... hmmm....

Off the top of my head, I know there is Aetna, Oxford, GHI, HIP, Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield ... And they've been there at least 9 years ... The benefits for just about all of them, other than HIP, would be considered very good benefits even if offered by an employer ... Why are they nearly the same price, you might ask ... You'd have to talk to the New York state insurance department ... They are the ones who approve ALL rates.

And NY insurers most definitely do block coverage for many individuals. I have two immediate friends who can't get health insurance.

Correct ... If they went without insurance for a while they'd get stuck with a waiting periods and/or exclusions ... Which makes perfect sense ... You can't get fire insurance to start yesterday to cover the house that just burned to the ground ...

Still, following your logic; are you saying that the problem with New York's insurance regulations is that too many New Yorkers are getting coverage? No ... I thought it would be rather obvious ... The regulations cause sky-rocketing premiums ... Remove the regulations ... More insurers will flock to the state and prices will drop considerably.

That if the insurance industry here were allowed to discriminate based on a broad range of criteria, choosing only the most profitable customers, that my premiums would be more affordable? Did you miss where I defined discriminate? Discriminate with regards to premium = rates dependent upon age/gender/health status/location ...

That this would bring New York back down to a 1 or a 2 like the rest of the country where presumably the insurance industry already has carte blanch when it comes to vetting its customers? 1 or 2 insurers in a state???? The only state like that is Hawaii ... Montana is the next closest, but I can still think of at least three individual insurance carriers in the state ... Massachusettes might be the next closest, though I have no idea how their system actually works ... All I know is I get tons of calls from residents trying to get insurance off the state plan.

What's supposed to happen to everybody else? How old are you Rand? How old am I? Ahh ... The classic 'You are too young and naive to understand things' argument ... Let's try another approach ... How long have you studied the insurance industry?? My guess is that I am far more aware of nuances within the industry and have a lot more experience ... Granted, I may have only been here 9 years, parents here 35 years ... I may have only worked with more individuals on a yearly basis than most agents work with in their lifetime ... But I am the young and stu.pid kid ... Hahhahaha ... I love it!

Are you old enough to realize that all kinds of things are going to be going wrong with you real soon? Nah ... Not old enough at all ... Still working on getting rid of my baby teeth ...

Why don't we all have the right to decent health care in this country, that doesn't cost more than our homes?! For most, it doesn't cost more than their homes ...

Why can the other developed nations afford to care for their citizens but we, supposedly the wealthiest country of all cannot? Because they get taxed up the wazoo for it ...
I am curious though ... Nothing in my previous post was negative towards you in any way shape or form ... Yet, my intelligence/awareness/age are being attacked by you ...
- November 6th, 2009, 09:43 am
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#42   Reply With Quote
nightling's Avatar

nightling is drinking coffee, reading science articles, and enjoying the sunshine.

Veteran

Join Date: Sep 2009

Posts: 1,270

See profile

The rhetoric itself is largely meaningless. It's all about where the money goes.

You could fix health care access by 1) letting national associations provide insurance without regard to state borders (which large corporations are already allowed to do freely) and 2) contracting with existing doctors to set up sliding fee clinics where those without insurance pay based on their ability to pay. People on Medicaid could then work part-time jobs without completely losing health care benefits — they'd just pay a larger share of their costs.

My two cents fwiw. Which is not much.
- November 6th, 2009, 10:31 am
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#43   Reply With Quote
bigfincat's Avatar

Virtuoso

Join Date: Nov 2008

Posts: 2,786

See profile

dito wrote :
They are separate businesses, aye?

But if they can make more profits by volume why not lower prices?

Exactly and it will get worse. What do you think a mandate to buy insurance will do? That's right, more money to insurance companies and they wont be forced to lower their rates.

Bad doctors go under and good ones prosper.



One thing about the Dr.'s argument does not make sense to me.

OK...he states that Medicare/Medicaid sets its prices & excludes competition... which he claims results in higher costs to consumers... yet Drs. complain constantly that they are not paid enough for procedures from the patients that have those benefits.

On a side note... I would love to see Napolitano disect corporate law for Constitutionality for once. He is a huge fan of any law that favors big business. Quite one sided & biased.

I say that we get government out of health care... I think that I will even forego all Doctors & get my diagnoses from the internet or others that have the same ailments. I will go directly to the pharmacy for my meds. If the gov't is going to force me to go to a Dr. to get medicine then they must be controlled. Much like utilities, healthcare is in constant demand. It doesn't act in the same manner as other free market products.

I do wonder how little a Dr. will charge for a procedure. How much money will he settle for per year in order to stay competitive? There is a difference because one Dr CANNOT produce an unlimited amount of product. There is a very finite number of patients that they can treat safely per day. It is not like Doritos where they will just keep making more. He cannot offer things cheaper unless he decides to earn less. What will that do to the supply of Drs.?? Will someone that spent a couple hundred thousand on education cut their salary in half? OR is it more likely that they will act as a sort of union with rules to protect the industry?? I would bet you that they would have industry minimums in no time at all even if gov't was completely out of the picture.

Even my industry does this. Those with a license must behave a certain way. The industry also ensures that certain things can only be purchased through someone with a license. Some manufacturers are not allowed to sell their product directly to the consumer. It happens all the time & already does in the healthcare industry.
- November 6th, 2009, 07:36 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#44   Reply With Quote
Can_I_just_be_Jo's Avatar

Can_I_just_be_Jo Blissfully happy!

Enthusiast

Join Date: Oct 2009

Posts: 601

See profile

bigfincat wrote :
OK...he states that Medicare/Medicaid sets its prices & excludes competition... which he claims results in higher costs to consumers... yet Drs. complain constantly that they are not paid enough for procedures from the patients that have those benefits.
Oh I got this one. Medicare and Medicaid only cover around 95% of the cost of any procedure. The remaining 5% is shifted to private insurance in the form of higher rates. An example; say a procedure cost 100 dollars, Medicare only pays the doctor 95 dollars, if another patent under private insurance has the same procedure the doctor bills the insurance company 105 dollars. Say you have two Medicare and one private, then the private insurance is billed 110 for the procedure.

It is a mess but we actually pay more in private insurance to support the government programs than we do to support the uninsured. Something our government doesn't like us looking at.
- November 7th, 2009, 12:54 am
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#45   Reply With Quote

ADVERTISEMENT

dito's Avatar

Veteran

Join Date: Dec 2008

Posts: 1,150

See profile

bigfincat wrote :
One thing about the Dr.'s argument does not make sense to me.

OK...he states that Medicare/Medicaid sets its prices & excludes competition... which he claims results in higher costs to consumers... yet Drs. complain constantly that they are not paid enough for procedures from the patients that have those benefits.

On a side note... I would love to see Napolitano disect corporate law for Constitutionality for once. He is a huge fan of any law that favors big business. Quite one sided & biased.

I say that we get government out of health care... I think that I will even forego all Doctors & get my diagnoses from the internet or others that have the same ailments. I will go directly to the pharmacy for my meds. If the gov't is going to force me to go to a Dr. to get medicine then they must be controlled. Much like utilities, healthcare is in constant demand. It doesn't act in the same manner as other free market products.

I do wonder how little a Dr. will charge for a procedure. How much money will he settle for per year in order to stay competitive? There is a difference because one Dr CANNOT produce an unlimited amount of product. There is a very finite number of patients that they can treat safely per day. It is not like Doritos where they will just keep making more. He cannot offer things cheaper unless he decides to earn less. What will that do to the supply of Drs.?? Will someone that spent a couple hundred thousand on education cut their salary in half? OR is it more likely that they will act as a sort of union with rules to protect the industry?? I would bet you that they would have industry minimums in no time at all even if gov't was completely out of the picture.

Even my industry does this. Those with a license must behave a certain way. The industry also ensures that certain things can only be purchased through someone with a license. Some manufacturers are not allowed to sell their product directly to the consumer. It happens all the time & already does in the healthcare industry.
Maybe he's talking about the things that they buy. I think Haz posted a thread on that recently. Lots of waste.

Napolitano has discussed that before. He is very against corporatism.

Sounds like you can't make decisions for yourself and need someone to make them for you.
- November 7th, 2009, 12:35 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#46   Reply With Quote
bigfincat's Avatar

Virtuoso

Join Date: Nov 2008

Posts: 2,786

See profile

dito wrote :
Maybe he's talking about the things that they buy. I think Haz posted a thread on that recently. Lots of waste.

Napolitano has discussed that before. He is very against corporatism.

Sounds like you can't make decisions for yourself and need someone to make them for you.
I know exactly what I like & want. Never an issue.
- November 7th, 2009, 09:46 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#47   Reply With Quote
bigfincat's Avatar

Virtuoso

Join Date: Nov 2008

Posts: 2,786

See profile

Half way home.
- November 7th, 2009, 09:51 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#48   Reply With Quote
dito's Avatar

Veteran

Join Date: Dec 2008

Posts: 1,150

See profile

They likened the passing of this to medicare and social security two failed and bankrupt programs. Now there is another government program for people to be dependent on(assuming it passes the senate).

In a way I hope it does pass along with the cap and tax bill. The sooner we can get to the collapse and rebuild the better. But things can always get worse too.
- November 8th, 2009, 08:26 am
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#49   Reply With Quote
independentthinker's Avatar

Newbie

Join Date: Oct 2009

Posts: 31

See profile

dito wrote :
They likened the passing of this to medicare and social security two failed and bankrupt programs. Now there is another government program for people to be dependent on(assuming it passes the senate).

In a way I hope it does pass along with the cap and tax bill. The sooner we can get to the collapse and rebuild the better. But things can always get worse too.
I won't make assumptions about how knowledgeable you are about some things, so I will state the following for anyone who might not know:

Social security and medicare had their genesis in the fact that under our great capitalist system, masses of people, most who had worked their whole lives and never had spendthrift ways, were unable to put aside enough money to survive with minimum comfort when their bodies were too aged and ill to work anymore. Further, in addition to struggling not to starve or live on the streets, they lacked the means to access medical care at the time the majority needed it the most. Previous generations found it shameful to see the elderly salt of the earth who had done their share to be productive citizens when they could living and dying in destitution. A system was put in place to help shield people against such an end. It isn't charity, as we all contribute from our pay over the course of our working lives.

These programs may have their flaws -- and I don't know a single institution, public or private that doesn't- but many decades later they still serve that purpose. Some are "dependent"; for some the money is gravy on top of what they already have, but those tend to be the few very high earners. I find complaints of people being dependent on medicare especially stunning, at a time when there isn't a person with ears alive in this country who doesn't know that insurance companies don't voluntarily touch anyone with a meaningful medical issue (and many people with only minor issues) or at high risk for one, which is just about 99% of people eligble for medicare. Also, medicare isn't free. To some at least. People pay "premiums" and a myriad of fees just like they do with private insurance policies. The life one can afford subsisting only on these programs isn't pretty.

What would you rather see instead? Old people starving in tents on the streets? We already have plenty of that. I am frankly worried about what the future portends as it is, as the waves of people whose pensions were gutted by modern day robber barons at the head of corporations enter retirement and struggle to make it on the crumbs left for them through the PBGC. Not to mention those coming age in the 401K only era, for whom any kind of pension is an utter fantasy. The fairly young should beware as well, as it is now impossible for most people who pursue college or advanced degrees not to graduate with 30 years of debt from that as well.

How can people save adequately for their sunset years when under our existing system a lifetime of gain and ownership of a home can be wiped out by a single major medical episode?

How soon some forget (if they ever knew).
- November 8th, 2009, 03:13 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#50   Reply With Quote

ADVERTISEMENT

Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question: Why is socialism bad? The1Tomcat Politics 268 November 18th, 2009 10:20 am
Deal breakers or no? Shepherd3597 Relationships 9 September 23rd, 2009 06:13 pm
Vote For Your Choice On Healthcare DennisWisconsin Everything Else 0 August 19th, 2009 11:47 pm

Latest on our Dating Advice Discussion Boards

“Oh ya, I usually close guys who says they'll tell me later on those questions about what only your friends know about you or the anything else question that drives me crazy.” – melcalrrt

Join the “why does no girl give me a chance?” discussion

“ Ah yes, everyone comes around eventually. Glad to hear it.” – melman

Join the “Does a woman's financial well being, profession, and wage matter to the men?” discussion

“BEA, I am sorry you are sick again. I was very sick this week and it was horrible. Yuck!! I still managed to put in forty hours this week. Which is less than normal for me but I did it with only two ... ” – brneyedangel

Join the “Gimme some Friday Night Roll Call !!!!” discussion

“One of my closest female friends asked me if I would be interested in meeting someone a few months ago. Ever since I reentered the dating world 3 years ago I've been open to meeting anyone...this ... ” – wilky

Join the “Dating and insecurity” discussion

“Let's not have this argument yet again. Although it is possible to re-open a match who sends you "Good luck with your search", no one interprets this as a request to re-open. That's what the other ... ” – melman

Join the “Re-opening a Closed Match” discussion

“I am most definitely a Type A personality and I tend to get along with Type B -they put things in perspective for me. Indeed, I am a stress junkie. I am a litigation lawyer” – mari3434

Join the “Are you type "A" or "B"? Which works best for you?” discussion

“It is probably better to not say that you are committment minded. Some women don't know how to take that because it is not what they are used to or it doesn't fit the image of the guy in their ... ” – bigfincat

Join the “She does not want to be with me because I'm "too nice".” discussion

“Online dating is not a fast process. Many, many people will be losers, flakes, and worse. It matters a lot that you learn how to make a good profile and photos, and give it time - while keeping ... ” – D_Lion

Join the “What am I doing wrong?” discussion



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:31 pm.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0