Why Did Medical Lawsuit Liabilities Stay Flat and Insurance Quadrupled?

[FreedomAli]

Could it be corporate GREED? How do the justify charging so much more for insurance when the payouts for malpactice have remained static?

In fact, it is harder now than it ever was to win a lawsuit and often times redress isn't sought because the system is so good at protecting doctors who screw up. Some states make it next to impossible to win a lawsuit and, of course, they attract the worst doctors who seek protection from their incompetence.

It is so difficult to win a lawsuit that often times people end up living miserably due to a doctor's mistake.

But studies have show that the payouts for malpractice have remained static, but the malpractice insurance has gone throuh the roof.

The legislation insurance companies want is the type that doesn't may them liabile for anything while they rake in billions.

And doctors just pass that cost along to consumers.

 

[Oddball]

Because the insurance companies are having high risks forced onto the rolls.

DUUUUH!

 

[Political Junky]

Wellpoint - Executives at health insurance giants cash in as firms plan fee hikes - Los Angeles Times

H. Edward Hanway, former chief executive of Philadelphia-based Cigna, topped the list of high-paid executives, thanks to a retirement package worth $110.9 million. Cigna paid Hanway and his successor, David Cordani, a total of $136.3 million last year.

 

[percysunshine]

Could it be corporate GREED? How do the justify charging so much more for insurance when the payouts for malpactice have remained static?

...blah...blah...blah...

Obamacare. They started taxing medical care four years before providing benefits.

Live with the horror...

 

[RDD_1210]

Because the insurance companies are having high risks forced onto the rolls.

DUUUUH!

And more customers to offset that increased risk. So that would make you incorrect.

 

[percysunshine]

Because the insurance companies are having high risks forced onto the rolls.

DUUUUH!

And more customers to offset that increased risk. So that would make you incorrect.

So you are endorsing fascist big business?

Y'all need to think these arguments through a bit.

 

[RDD_1210]

Because the insurance companies are having high risks forced onto the rolls.

DUUUUH!

And more customers to offset that increased risk. So that would make you incorrect.

So you are endorsing fascist big business?

Y'all need to think these arguments through a bit.

Not at all, but that's how the law is set up to work. I am giving you facts, while others are spreading lies.

 

[percysunshine]

And more customers to offset that increased risk. So that would make you incorrect.

So you are endorsing fascist big business?

Y'all need to think these arguments through a bit.

Not at all, but that's how the law is set up to work. I am giving you facts, while others are spreading lies.

So, like, who wrote the law?

Y'all need to think these arguments through a bit.

 

[FreedomAli]

And, the people being forced onto the rolls are also young people who don't want healthcare because they are young and healthy, but are forced to pay even though they will use less services than any other age group. The insurance industry is crying because they steal so much wealth and now will be cut out.

 

[RDD_1210]

So you are endorsing fascist big business?

Y'all need to think these arguments through a bit.

Not at all, but that's how the law is set up to work. I am giving you facts, while others are spreading lies.

So, like, who wrote the law?

Y'all need to think these arguments through a bit.

Y'all need to come up with a new shtick. Make your point already, I don't feel like dancing with you right now.

 

[RDD_1210]

And, the people being forced onto the rolls are also young people who don't want healthcare because they are young and healthy, but are forced to pay even though they will use less services than any other age group. The insurance industry is crying because they steal so much wealth and now will be cut out.

The insurance companies are the ones who demanded those young people be added in through the mandate. Anyone that doesn't like it should take it up with their insurance company.

 

[percysunshine]

Not at all, but that's how the law is set up to work. I am giving you facts, while others are spreading lies.

So, like, who wrote the law?

Y'all need to think these arguments through a bit.

Y'all need to come up with a new shtick. Make your point already, I don't feel like dancing with you right now.

Your 'uncle' accepted....chuckle

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Could it be corporate GREED? How do the justify charging so much more for insurance when the payouts for malpactice have remained static?

In fact, it is harder now than it ever was to win a lawsuit and often times redress isn't sought because the system is so good at protecting doctors who screw up. Some states make it next to impossible to win a lawsuit and, of course, they attract the worst doctors who seek protection from their incompetence.

It is so difficult to win a lawsuit that often times people end up living miserably due to a doctor's mistake.

But studies have show that the payouts for malpractice have remained static, but the malpractice insurance has gone throuh the roof.

The legislation insurance companies want is the type that doesn't may them liabile for anything while they rake in billions.

And doctors just pass that cost along to consumers.

The mere act of posing this question leads me to believe that you'll never understand, so why bother.

Yup.. greed... that's it.

I think Bush, Cheney and Halliburton may also be involved, you should look into that while you're at it.

 

[Sallow]

Could it be corporate GREED? How do the justify charging so much more for insurance when the payouts for malpactice have remained static?

In fact, it is harder now than it ever was to win a lawsuit and often times redress isn't sought because the system is so good at protecting doctors who screw up. Some states make it next to impossible to win a lawsuit and, of course, they attract the worst doctors who seek protection from their incompetence.

It is so difficult to win a lawsuit that often times people end up living miserably due to a doctor's mistake.

But studies have show that the payouts for malpractice have remained static, but the malpractice insurance has gone throuh the roof.

The legislation insurance companies want is the type that doesn't may them liabile for anything while they rake in billions.

And doctors just pass that cost along to consumers.

Court awards for malpractice suits are wildly exaggerated by the medical community and in practice are few and far between. What really costs HMOs big money is playing the markets. That's the actual cost they pass to consumers. It has nothing to do with Medicine.

 

[kiwiman127]

Could it be corporate GREED? How do the justify charging so much more for insurance when the payouts for malpractice have remained static?

In fact, it is harder now than it ever was to win a lawsuit and often times redress isn't sought because the system is so good at protecting doctors who screw up. Some states make it next to impossible to win a lawsuit and, of course, they attract the worst doctors who seek protection from their incompetence.

It is so difficult to win a lawsuit that often times people end up living miserably due to a doctor's mistake.

But studies have show that the payouts for malpractice have remained static, but the malpractice insurance has gone throuh the roof.

The legislation insurance companies want is the type that doesn't may them liabile for anything while they rake in billions.

And doctors just pass that cost along to consumers.

Court awards for malpractice suits are wildly exaggerated by the medical community and in practice are few and far between. What really costs HMOs big money is playing the markets. That's the actual cost they pass to consumers. It has nothing to do with Medicine.

"The CBO estimates that malpractice costs account for less than 2 percent of national health spending and that even significant reductions in these costs would only modestly affect the growth in overall health spending."
Medical Malpractice Policy: Background Brief - KaiserEDU.org, Health Policy Education from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

There you have it, malpractice costs account for only 2% of all healthcare spending. Yet, it's a battle cry for the fans keeping of status quo. Tort reform will change the costs of healthcare very little.

 

[gekaap]

So you are endorsing fascist big business?

Y'all need to think these arguments through a bit.

Again with the F-word. Explain to me how anything here has to do with the creation of the state being humanity's greatest achievement?

 

[Oddball]

Because the insurance companies are having high risks forced onto the rolls.

DUUUUH!

And more customers to offset that increased risk. So that would make you incorrect.

The increase of customers is amongst those in the highest risk groups....That's going to raise the overall costs for everyone.


I repeat....DUUUUH!

 

[RDD_1210]

Because the insurance companies are having high risks forced onto the rolls.

DUUUUH!

And more customers to offset that increased risk. So that would make you incorrect.

The increase of customers is amongst those in the highest risk groups....That's going to raise the overall costs for everyone.


I repeat....DUUUUH!

That again would be incorrect. I think it's time you posted your stock art that you like to use when you have no other argument to make.

 

[Oddball]

Maybe it's time for you to acquaint yourself with basic business accounting and statistics.