About to get a look at Obama's health care plan

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
You'd think from Gibb's remarks that the primary problem with health care is insurance.

They're just a go-between. By and large, their costs are reflected by the industries' costs - where comparisons abroad show, we pay twice as much for the same medical costs.

I liken it to Waste Management. They pick up my trash (or, they used to, until I got sick of them raising my rates). They charge one basic fee, and for that, they come to my house and take pretty much anything I put in that container. But if the county doubles its landfill costs, they have to raise theirs. WM isn't the problem - the county is.

Or I liken it to a gas station like Wawa. They price their gas on the amount they pay for it. They don't drill for oil. They don't build refineries. They buy and sell gas. If their prices go up, it's not their fault that oil is selling at 83 a barrel.

The problem insurance companies have is, they try to keep premiums at a mininum and still cover the expenses. But to keep us all from paying all of our fortunes for health care, they create limits. They have to. If they were auto insurance, the top cost is the cost of the car (barring medical liability). They can't put a cap on what they insure. Most of us will use about half the money we pay in premiums, but it still can't cover every mega-expensive procedure. They MUST put limits, or price themselves to the point where NO ONE can afford insurance.

Why? Because medical costs can rival the budgets of small nations. Health care COSTS are the problem. Not insurance companies. If we got rid of all insurance companies tomorrow, it wouldn't make health care costs necessarily cheaper - at least, not the really, really expensive ones, because NO ONE could afford them except the very rich.

But the Democrats are continually demonizing the insurance companies for their behavior regarding very expensive care. Why not demonize medical professionals, for charging tens of thousands for medical treatment, for charging hundreds of thousands for surgery? Or demonize lawyers, who sue and cost millions?
 

Starlifter756

New Member
You'd think from Gibb's remarks that the primary problem with health care is insurance.

They're just a go-between. By and large, their costs are reflected by the industries' costs - where comparisons abroad show, we pay twice as much for the same medical costs.

I liken it to Waste Management. They pick up my trash (or, they used to, until I got sick of them raising my rates). They charge one basic fee, and for that, they come to my house and take pretty much anything I put in that container. But if the county doubles its landfill costs, they have to raise theirs. WM isn't the problem - the county is.

Or I liken it to a gas station like Wawa. They price their gas on the amount they pay for it. They don't drill for oil. They don't build refineries. They buy and sell gas. If their prices go up, it's not their fault that oil is selling at 83 a barrel.

The problem insurance companies have is, they try to keep premiums at a mininum and still cover the expenses. But to keep us all from paying all of our fortunes for health care, they create limits. They have to. If they were auto insurance, the top cost is the cost of the car (barring medical liability). They can't put a cap on what they insure. Most of us will use about half the money we pay in premiums, but it still can't cover every mega-expensive procedure. They MUST put limits, or price themselves to the point where NO ONE can afford insurance.

Why? Because medical costs can rival the budgets of small nations. Health care COSTS are the problem. Not insurance companies. If we got rid of all insurance companies tomorrow, it wouldn't make health care costs necessarily cheaper - at least, not the really, really expensive ones, because NO ONE could afford them except the very rich.

But the Democrats are continually demonizing the insurance companies for their behavior regarding very expensive care. Why not demonize medical professionals, for charging tens of thousands for medical treatment, for charging hundreds of thousands for surgery? Or demonize lawyers, who sue and cost millions?

It is not insurance that is "THE" problem, but that is what this administration wants to capture. He needs this money not for health care, but for wealth redistribution. There are several things in this post that are depicted as the problem, but in fact are results of the problem.

First - this administration wants the insurance premium we are now paying and representing this through different avenues of revenue is the game. The quality of care will go down with the lack of competition and incentive. Remember, the IRS was going to manage the payment of your share of insurance - give that some real hard thought.

Second - Health Care reform should be just that. The liability laws needs to be reworked to reduce the liability costs to all levels of health care. If something bad happens to the person, they go after the doctor, nurses, hospitals, suppliers of equipment, administrators, everybody. They all have to have liability coverage. There was one report coming from a medical administration company that accounts receivable and accounts payable for numerous doctor's offices and they reported that between 75% - 90% of cost go to liability cost (unnecessary tests and procedures) and liability insurance and in one fashion or the other. This is to protect them from the lawyers who receive commissions on awards.

Third - since the only winners of any unfortunate event is the lawyers, the frivolous law suits should be re-evaluated and the awards to those not frivolous should be re-evaluated.

Fourth - we need to remove things like this report from happening.
snopes.com: Parkland Memorial Hospital and Illegal Immigrants

Lastly - certainly rel-evaluate insurance companies and the parameters in which they operate, portability, acceptance, limitations, etc.
 
C

czygvtwkr

Guest
I never said that. I want to pay a premium that is reasonably related to the services I use with some room for profit for the insurer and the provider. As it stands now I pay my insurance premiums, my deductibles, and taxes for medicare, medicaid and social security which I receive no benefit from. That's not a fair setup. You think it's perfect?

$14k a year sounds like an awful lot, what type of plan do you have?

When my father died 4 years ago I started on the search for health insurance for my mother. I found out alot about Health Savings plans and High Deductible Health Plans and think they are a great idea. I just could not convince my mother to go for a fairly low cost plan because it did not pay for the little things. She kept insisting that she needed something that would pay for prescriptions, so she spent $3k more a year for a more traditional plan. She has gotten exactly one $72 prescription filled in the last 3 years.

The problem with insurance is that people want it to pay for every little thing. Insurance should be for the big stuff that you cant (not don't want) to pay for such as heart attack recovery, not braces for the kids.

SO I am guessing either someone in your family has a chronic disease that costs the insurance company a lot of money or you have a "Cadillac Plan" that covers eyeglasses, braces, etc.
 

4Father

New Member
$14k a year sounds like an awful lot, what type of plan do you have?

When my father died 4 years ago I started on the search for health insurance for my mother. I found out alot about Health Savings plans and High Deductible Health Plans and think they are a great idea. I just could not convince my mother to go for a fairly low cost plan because it did not pay for the little things. She kept insisting that she needed something that would pay for prescriptions, so she spent $3k more a year for a more traditional plan. She has gotten exactly one $72 prescription filled in the last 3 years.

The problem with insurance is that people want it to pay for every little thing. Insurance should be for the big stuff that you cant (not don't want) to pay for such as heart attack recovery, not braces for the kids.

SO I am guessing either someone in your family has a chronic disease that costs the insurance company a lot of money or you have a "Cadillac Plan" that covers eyeglasses, braces, etc.

Not a Cadillac, more like a Camry. Blue Choice Care First HMO. 500.00/yr prescription deductible per family member, $35 deductible for office visits. We don't have any chronic diseases in the family. Dental, but only covers about 50 percent of most procedures.

I shopped several agencies and the price was almost exactly the same at each one. My understanding is that the rate is based on the average age of the group. Depending on what happens with the legislation I am going to look into a health savings plan next time around. They make me nervous though.
 
C

czygvtwkr

Guest
Not a Cadillac, more like a Camry. Blue Choice Care First HMO. 500.00/yr prescription deductible per family member, $35 deductible for office visits. We don't have any chronic diseases in the family. Dental, but only covers about 50 percent of most procedures.

I shopped several agencies and the price was almost exactly the same at each one. My understanding is that the rate is based on the average age of the group. Depending on what happens with the legislation I am going to look into a health savings plan next time around. They make me nervous though.

Most of the HDHP's I found (which you need for a HSP) have a max of $5k a year out of pocket, which is not bad at all if you have a big health problem. The younger you are the more a HDHP and HSA makes sense, I wish the government offered one.
 

ylexot

Super Genius
I didn't see any high deductible HSA plans either. I did see FSA's, which I've had for years. Those are completely different.

It's not a high deductible HSA plan. It is a HSA (Health Savings Account). I'll see if I can find the info.
 

Toxick

Splat
Healthcare Summit

GOP to Obama at summit: 'We have a better idea' - Yahoo! News


What a waste of ####ing time.
Posturing and lip service and nothing more.

Especially when this the upshot.


With those opposing positions well staked out before the meeting and no signs of them changing, the president and his Democratic allies prepared to move on alone.

One option is passing a comprehensive plan without GOP support, by using Senate budget reconciliation rules that would disallow GOP filibusters.




Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
My ass.



November is gonna be fun :)
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
Bipartisanship!
My ass.



November is gonna be fun :)

I liked how Newt addressed the bipartisanship of this in his CPAC address.

He said if it was bipartisan, then the Republicans need to say, "look, WE decide who gets to come, if it's gonna be bipartisan. We have a couple new governors who'd like to come". He also said that floor time needs to be divided evenly.

The Dems have NO wish whatsoever to come to terms with the GOP. They want to portray them as poorly as possible, so they schedule something to appear bipartisan, and then after slamming the door, claim they tried.
 

Otter

Nothing to see here
Exchange during today's Health Care Summit

(McCain) "Unfortunately this product . . . was produced behind closed doors," he said. "It was produced . . . with unsavory deal-making." McCain asserted that Americans "want us to go back to the beginning" and scrap the legislation now stuck in Congress.


"Let me just make this point, John, because we're not campaigning anymore: the election's over," Obama shot back. He disputed McCain's complaint about a lack of transparency, saying there had been "exhaustive" hearings and debate in the House and Senate.

The O's response is exactly in line with what I've come to expect from him. I don't care for McCain, but what he's saying has been reported by every paper in the USA, and Maobama just blows it off with a snarky comment.
 
Exchange during today's Health Care Summit

(McCain) "Unfortunately this product . . . was produced behind closed doors," he said. "It was produced . . . with unsavory deal-making." McCain asserted that Americans "want us to go back to the beginning" and scrap the legislation now stuck in Congress.


"Let me just make this point, John, because we're not campaigning anymore: the election's over," Obama shot back. He disputed McCain's complaint about a lack of transparency, saying there had been "exhaustive" hearings and debate in the House and Senate.


The O's response is exactly in line with what I've come to expect from him. I don't care for McCain, but what he's saying has been reported by every paper in the USA, and Maobama just blows it off with a snarky comment.

Did McCain, by any chance, respond by saying:

Which election's over Mr. President, the 2008 Presidential election or the 2010 Massachusetts election?

Cause that - that right there - would have been good TV.
 

libertytyranny

Dream Stealer
Yup. FSA. I've managed mine through FSAFEDS for a few years now. Totally worth it, especially with the new dental plan available through MetLife. All that crap for my teeth that it doesn't cover, the FSA pays for.

Of course, TECHNICALLY, *I* do, but I can spend it all on January 1. And it's pre-tax money.

But it's not really the same thing. The money has to be spent that year or it's lost..my understanding is that a HSA rolls over... I am young, so I have a fairly high deductable plan (not huge though, I dont have a lot of cash) and use the fsa. Its nice that it is before tax..and that all the money ios available day one..but I really wished it would roll over, that would be great fro me.
 

Baz

This. ------------------>
Exchange during today's Health Care Summit



The O's response is exactly in line with what I've come to expect from him. I don't care for McCain, but what he's saying has been reported by every paper in the USA, and Maobama just blows it off with a snarky comment.


There was more to Obama's response than what you chose to include.

Obama said in response, "Let me just make this point, John, because we're not campaigning anymore. The election's over."

"I am reminded of that every day," McCain said, forcing a smile.

Obama said the two could "spend the remainder of the time with our respective talking points going back and forth," but the topic on the table was insurance overhaul.

"So we can spend the remainder of the time with our respective talking points going back and forth, we were supposed to be talking about insurance reform," Obama responded. "Obviously I'm sure that Harry Reid and Chris Dodd and others who went through an exhaustive process through both the House and the Senate with the most hearings, the most debates on the floor, the longest markup in 22 years on each of these bills, will have a response for you. My concern is, if we do that, we are essentially back on Fox News and MSNBC on the split screen.

"My hope would be is that we can just focus on the issues about how we get a bill done and this would probably be a good time to turn it over to Sec. Sebelius."
 
Last edited:
Top