House Republicans Schedule Health Care Repeal

[Lyn]

If one were to use the metric of 10 year cost metric, I believe the non-partisan OMB has suggested that the holistic health plan and all accompanying provisions will be an improvement over the prior health policy in the US.

OMB is part of the problem, it always has and always will bow to political pressures. They revise thier findings to fit whatever senario the administation wants to push.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

OMB is part of the problem, it always has and always will bow to political pressures. They revise thier findings to fit whatever senario the administation wants to push.

CBO...OMB... not a dime's worth of difference.

 

[somarco]

it incorrectly blames insurance for the rise in health care costs. When you think this way, then stuff like Obamacare makes sense.

Problem is, insurance only has a minor part to do with health care costs

Actually, insurance is a contributor to the problem.

When you compare health insurance coverage to other lines such as auto and homeowners, what is covered by health insurance is ridiculous.

I don't have the figures handy, but 30 years ago consumers paid something on the order of 60% of their medical bills . . . now it is closer to 10%.

We have way too many people thinking they can't go to the doctor, or dentist, unless they have insurance.

What's up with that?

If auto policies covered tires, brakes and oil changes as well as other routine maintenance issues, no one could afford it.

But since health insurance policies pay for almost everything and consumers pay virtually nothing, there is no incentive to manage demand (consumer side), and none to control pricing on the provider side.

I can't tell you how often I talk to people who are on multiple meds because their doctor prescribed them and almost all are expensive brand name drugs.

How many people need to continue taking anti-depressants 10 yrs after their dog died?

Do you really need the BP med or could you do without if you lost 15 pounds?

I talked with a woman a few years ago that did not take any medication. Submitted an app, turned down.

Called and was told she left off a few medications.

Went back to the lady, she admitted to 3 meds but she only takes them as needed.

Submitted the app again. Declined again.

WTF?

Called again. She still missed a few. How many? Over the last 2 years she had been prescribed 17 medications, some were never filled, some filled and never taken.

When people have a blank check to pay for health care they don't stop to think about how much things cost. That drives up total expenditure on health care which drives up premiums.

Don't expect any of the idiots in Washington to understand that.

 

[djs]

Somarco - I completely agree that the medical insurance availability to pay for everything prevents common sense market forces from working. I eluded to this in the last paragraph of the post you quoted, but you said it much more eloquently.

After all, shouldn't it be just like auto insurance? People get little dings on their car, little scratches, they don't file claims since it isn't practical to do so. They get into a big accident, they file a claim and deal with it. By the way, no, it really shouldn't be just like auto insurance, but I hear that phrase a lot!!!

Of course, chiropractors have gotten in on the act with auto insurance. Involved in an accident? Come see us, we'll find something wrong with you so the insurance company can pay.

Dan

 

[ijerome]

Somarco, you are absolutely correct. However many of us have participated in group health plans for many years and even changed jobs only if fully paid health plans were part of the package. Then, reaching 65 comes medicare and supps. and all our needs are taken care of. The insurance companies joined the parade of Wall Street and failed to take care of children, pre-ex. and now Government has taken over. Throw in new technology, costly meds, computer diagnostics, outrageous cost of
mal-practice insurance and you have a mess that will take years to straighten out. If ever. Yes, we are headed for single payer but many years down the line. So all we can do now is continue to help people get the best coverage that fits their budget. And earn enough to pay the rent and dsl service.

 

[VolAgent]

Somarco, you are absolutely correct. However many of us have participated in group health plans for many years and even changed jobs only if fully paid health plans were part of the package. Then, reaching 65 comes medicare and supps. and all our needs are taken care of. The insurance companies joined the parade of Wall Street and failed to take care of children, pre-ex. and now Government has taken over. Throw in new technology, costly meds, computer diagnostics, outrageous cost of
mal-practice insurance and you have a mess that will take years to straighten out. If ever. Yes, we are headed for single payer but many years down the line. So all we can do now is continue to help people get the best coverage that fits their budget. And earn enough to pay the rent and dsl service.

To imply that health insurance companies failed us in taking care of children and due to pre-ex is simply incorrect. They have to exist in the frame work that exists.

If you want to blame someone, blame FDR, Congress and Kaiser. Henry J. Kaiser was a businessman, shipbuilder and construction company owner, one of the six that built Hoover Dam. When FDR and Congress imposed wage caps during WWII, they made fringe benefits uncapped and tax-deductible. Kaiser was interested in improving the productivity of his workers, and soon it got expanded to cover dependents. Thus was the beginning of employer paid health insurance.

Pre-ex and child coverage wasn't an issue in the group market. That simple fact skewed everything, people saw there was no individual underwriting when getting on the employer plan, and just assumed it should be the same for an individual plan.

 

[djs]

Actually, the real problem, like it or not, is somewhere along the line, people started believing healthcare was a right, not a benefit. Once you cross that boundary, then unlimited healthcare becomes a right, leading us up to today where costs shouldn't matter, regardless of the potential outcome.

Dan

 

[CHUMPS FROM OXFORD]

Of course, everything is in hold right now.

 

[somarco]

Pre-ex and child coverage wasn't an issue in the group market.

Nor with Medicaid, SCHIP or Medicare (disabled children). Or COBRA or HIPAA conversions or risk pools.

This issue of uninsurables, which affects less than 10% of the population, only exists in a very small sub-group, specifically those who do not qualify for employer or govt programs.

 

[MtFIA]

<SNIP>
All I meant by 'you should read more' was everything you said seems to be inline with one side of the issues. I shorthanded reading more information about both sides. Yes, both sides have some good points, both sides are off base in many ways. I wish Republicans would have presented a plan, rather than just some ideas (arguably they did, but not really). Buying insurance across state lines is an idea that doesn't work in practice, but people still think it sounds good.

I wish I had time to read more.....

Dan

Here I agree with you. The issue reaches far beyond you and me. I also wish I had more time to read, think, analyze, and draw good conclusions. The bigger issue, for me, is that there are so many people out there that don't care about reading and thinking at all. They respond to emotion, fear, and short sound bites (one way or the other) which is why I was so reactionary when I perceived that was what you were doing.

Even *worse* is that both the politicians and most media feed the rhetoric and sound bite mentality which reinforces fringe level and emotional discussion. There are SO few people out there that ignore the sound bites and try to understand the underlying facts & analysis.

Probably not a surprise to many of you, I am a fan of Jon Stewart. In particular, I was a big fan of his rally to restore sanity...the majority are being represented by the fringes that yell loudly.

WRT health care, for *me*, the implicaiton is that this plan isn't all that I was hoping it would be. On the other hand, I don't think that the old plan was as bad as it was villified for in order to get in the new plan. However, that also feeds my position that I don't, for a second, buy the analysis that the new plan will lead to the downfall of America, complete destruction of our health care system, or destroy our economy. Those hyperboles are great sound bites--but I don't see any good analysis leading to it.

Lastly, I agree that the chief Republican issue is that they are villifying something with nothing to offer in return except to "uproot it and replace it with something they know will be better." Heck, I'm happy to vote for something better, I haven't a clue what that is and am not prepared to return to the prior status quo and endure 15 years of new quibbling.