Is it time for Universal Healthcare....and can it be done?

[debbiedowner]

"In another attempt to undermine health care, the Trump Administration is putting power back into the hands of insurance companies by making it easier for them to sell junk insurance -- plans that skirt patient protections for pre-existing conditions and maternity care." - Senator Patty Murray

How many people TRULY were unable to get health insurance BEFORE ACA because of "pre-existing conditions"?
Now don't use the gigantic lie Obama stated:Up to half of all Americans have a pre-existing condition." — Barack Obama on Thursday, September 26th, 2013 in a speech about ACA.

I'm waiting for you to do a little research as I know the answer but YOU need to do some scholarly work and see how your BIASED MSM has NOT shared the Truth that Obama LIED
about i.e. half of all Americans!

Depending on what company and state about 40% were either declined or had certain conditions excluded.

 

[dblack]

The endgame's a *****.

 

[froggy]

"In another attempt to undermine health care, the Trump Administration is putting power back into the hands of insurance companies by making it easier for them to sell junk insurance -- plans that skirt patient protections for pre-existing conditions and maternity care." - Senator Patty Murray

How many people TRULY were unable to get health insurance BEFORE ACA because of "pre-existing conditions"?
Now don't use the gigantic lie Obama stated:Up to half of all Americans have a pre-existing condition." — Barack Obama on Thursday, September 26th, 2013 in a speech about ACA.

I'm waiting for you to do a little research as I know the answer but YOU need to do some scholarly work and see how your BIASED MSM has NOT shared the Truth that Obama LIED
about i.e. half of all Americans!

Depending on what company and state about 40% were either declined or had certain conditions excluded.

The only ones who benefited from Obamacare was the insurance companies

 

[debbiedowner]

Remember the 1946 Tort Reform act says you can't sue doctors on government payroll.
Consequently less than half the doctors practice defensive medicine as they KNOW they won't get sued.

But non-government physicians 92% order duplicate tests, etc. practice defensive medicine and the COST is paid by the insurance companies as they simply raise the premiums.
Remember all insurance companies are regulated by states.

All states require companies to have reserves for future claims.

Reserves come from premiums that aren't used to pay claims...
(average insurance company pays out about 80% of premiums in claims...
i.e. defensive medicine included) and of the balance of 20% revenue pays salaries,etc.

AND then if any profits add to reserves... and then any profits left out of the 6% after salaries, etc., taxes reserves... Again a major reason many companies pulled out of Obamacare because the idiots forced companies to pay 85%...i.e. called medical liability ratio.
Left no money for profits which are used to build reserves required by states!

85% for group, 80% for individual plans.

 

[debbiedowner]

"In another attempt to undermine health care, the Trump Administration is putting power back into the hands of insurance companies by making it easier for them to sell junk insurance -- plans that skirt patient protections for pre-existing conditions and maternity care." - Senator Patty Murray

How many people TRULY were unable to get health insurance BEFORE ACA because of "pre-existing conditions"?
Now don't use the gigantic lie Obama stated:Up to half of all Americans have a pre-existing condition." — Barack Obama on Thursday, September 26th, 2013 in a speech about ACA.

I'm waiting for you to do a little research as I know the answer but YOU need to do some scholarly work and see how your BIASED MSM has NOT shared the Truth that Obama LIED
about i.e. half of all Americans!

Depending on what company and state about 40% were either declined or had certain conditions excluded.

The only ones who benefited from Obamacare was the insurance companies

Most of them, yes, but not all.

 

[froggy]

"In another attempt to undermine health care, the Trump Administration is putting power back into the hands of insurance companies by making it easier for them to sell junk insurance -- plans that skirt patient protections for pre-existing conditions and maternity care." - Senator Patty Murray

How many people TRULY were unable to get health insurance BEFORE ACA because of "pre-existing conditions"?
Now don't use the gigantic lie Obama stated:Up to half of all Americans have a pre-existing condition." — Barack Obama on Thursday, September 26th, 2013 in a speech about ACA.

I'm waiting for you to do a little research as I know the answer but YOU need to do some scholarly work and see how your BIASED MSM has NOT shared the Truth that Obama LIED
about i.e. half of all Americans!

Depending on what company and state about 40% were either declined or had certain conditions excluded.

The only ones who benefited from Obamacare was the insurance companies

Most of them, yes, but not all.

The ones that require you to meet your deductible before they pay anything benefited the most

 

[francoHFW]

It is way past time for Universal Health Care. Why are we the only developed country without Healthcare daycare paid parental leave living wage cheap College and training good vacations Fair taxes on the rich national ID card to stop illegal immigration Etc etc etc? Scumbag GOP and silly dupes Like Norman...

The socialized medical care in other countries is only affordable now, because the United States spends our money to protect those countries. If they each had to pony up enough money to keep their countries safe, they couldn't afford their unaffordable healthcare. And if you look at their books... their health care systems are unsustainable, even with the U.S. protecting them.

Meanwhile in the real world they are all paying 8 to 12 percent of GDP for their health care, while we're now at 18 percent for this bought off GOP scam.

And the trade off..

But part of the reason why Europeans accept restrictions on their ability to sue doctors for malpractice is that they have guaranteed health insurance.
It's part of the social contract: doctors accept limited salaries in exchange for limited liability; patients accept that they cannot sue doctors for millions of dollars in exchange for a guarantee of access to decent health care.
Malpractice and the social contract

But here in the USA doctor studies estimate nearly $1 TRILLION a year is wasted on defensive medicine.

So either you
A) defend lawyers and the billions they make (average lawyer salary:Lawyers earned an average annual salary of $139,880 in 2016,)
How Much Can a Lawyer Expect to Get Paid?
B) accept tort reform similar to Europe.

Can't have it either way.

View attachment 208704

Sounds good... We almost have terminal jurisprudence... Many times as many lawyers as anywhere else, too many damn lawyers!

 

[francoHFW]

"In another attempt to undermine health care, the Trump Administration is putting power back into the hands of insurance companies by making it easier for them to sell junk insurance -- plans that skirt patient protections for pre-existing conditions and maternity care." - Senator Patty Murray

How many people TRULY were unable to get health insurance BEFORE ACA because of "pre-existing conditions"?
Now don't use the gigantic lie Obama stated:Up to half of all Americans have a pre-existing condition." — Barack Obama on Thursday, September 26th, 2013 in a speech about ACA.

I'm waiting for you to do a little research as I know the answer but YOU need to do some scholarly work and see how your BIASED MSM has NOT shared the Truth that Obama LIED
about i.e. half of all Americans!

Depending on what company and state about 40% were either declined or had certain conditions excluded.

The only ones who benefited from Obamacare was the insurance companies

Most of them, yes, but not all.

The ones that require you to meet your deductible before they pay anything benefited the most

Just the beginning of needed regulation has happened

 

[francoHFW]

First off, for those that know me...I am a conservative.
I do ask the question in sincerity.
Last year with health premiums, and healthcare bills, my wife and I spent $7,040 for the two of us.
Then add in the employers portion of premium and that totals up to roughly $11,000.
Even with that, we are well below the average cost the average American pays.
So, would I pay out say... $600 a month in taxes, and my employer in lieu of paying premiums, pay another $400 a month? Instead of paying an insurer?
Yes, yes I would.
But only if the care was equally as good.
And would it be?
How would we, as a nation, pay for the bums and lazy asses who won't work?
Should a "health tax" be income specific? So someone who makes $250,000 a year would pay a great deal more than a $50,000 a year person? Would that work?

One thing is for certain. The current system is not working well. We are paying more and more and more to insurers who are raising deductibles and increasing premiums while covering less.
What fix is there?

Something has to be done to fix the disaster we are in now

Which isn't to say that "anything" should be done. Or to imply that "anything" is better than nothing. Doing something that would make things worse, for example, should NOT be done.

What's done is worse I had good insurance before Obamacare

It was probably about to crash anyway... Hi deductibles and catastrophic coverage was just the way things were going. You were probably due for a downgrade... The problem in the US is out of control costs. Thanks GOP!

Now I have high premiums High deductibles and no coverage

Yes you have guaranteed insurance with a annual cap on out of pocket spending and many free tests...

 

[francoHFW]

Remember the 1946 Tort Reform act says you can't sue doctors on government payroll.
Consequently less than half the doctors practice defensive medicine as they KNOW they won't get sued.

But non-government physicians 92% order duplicate tests, etc. practice defensive medicine and the COST is paid by the insurance companies as they simply raise the premiums.
Remember all insurance companies are regulated by states.

All states require companies to have reserves for future claims.

Reserves come from premiums that aren't used to pay claims...
(average insurance company pays out about 80% of premiums in claims...
i.e. defensive medicine included) and of the balance of 20% revenue pays salaries,etc.

AND then if any profits add to reserves... and then any profits left out of the 6% after salaries, etc., taxes reserves... Again a major reason many companies pulled out of Obamacare because the idiots forced companies to pay 85%...i.e. called medical liability ratio.
Left no money for profits which are used to build reserves required by states!

Very few doctors are on government payroll d u h

 

[BluesLegend]

First off, for those that know me...I am a conservative.
I do ask the question in sincerity.
Last year with health premiums, and healthcare bills, my wife and I spent $7,040 for the two of us.
Then add in the employers portion of premium and that totals up to roughly $11,000.
Even with that, we are well below the average cost the average American pays.
So, would I pay out say... $600 a month in taxes, and my employer in lieu of paying premiums, pay another $400 a month? Instead of paying an insurer?
Yes, yes I would.
But only if the care was equally as good.
And would it be?
How would we, as a nation, pay for the bums and lazy asses who won't work?
Should a "health tax" be income specific? So someone who makes $250,000 a year would pay a great deal more than a $50,000 a year person? Would that work?

One thing is for certain. The current system is not working well. We are paying more and more and more to insurers who are raising deductibles and increasing premiums while covering less.
What fix is there?

Something has to be done to fix the disaster we are in now

Which isn't to say that "anything" should be done. Or to imply that "anything" is better than nothing. Doing something that would make things worse, for example, should NOT be done.

What's done is worse I had good insurance before Obamacare

It was probably about to crash anyway... Hi deductibles and catastrophic coverage was just the way things were going. You were probably due for a downgrade... The problem in the US is out of control costs. Thanks GOP!

Now I have high premiums High deductibles and no coverage

A catastrophic plan would have been cheaper, but they need your money to pay for all the mooching deadbeats.

 

[francoHFW]

First off, for those that know me...I am a conservative.
I do ask the question in sincerity.
Last year with health premiums, and healthcare bills, my wife and I spent $7,040 for the two of us.
Then add in the employers portion of premium and that totals up to roughly $11,000.
Even with that, we are well below the average cost the average American pays.
So, would I pay out say... $600 a month in taxes, and my employer in lieu of paying premiums, pay another $400 a month? Instead of paying an insurer?
Yes, yes I would.
But only if the care was equally as good.
And would it be?
How would we, as a nation, pay for the bums and lazy asses who won't work?
Should a "health tax" be income specific? So someone who makes $250,000 a year would pay a great deal more than a $50,000 a year person? Would that work?

One thing is for certain. The current system is not working well. We are paying more and more and more to insurers who are raising deductibles and increasing premiums while covering less.
What fix is there?

Something has to be done to fix the disaster we are in now

Which isn't to say that "anything" should be done. Or to imply that "anything" is better than nothing. Doing something that would make things worse, for example, should NOT be done.

What's done is worse I had good insurance before Obamacare

It wasn't guaranteed before. there was no annual cap before..
The problem is our Healthcare is way too expensive. Now we have a way to add regulations. Of course the GOP is owned Lock Stock & Barrel by big health big Pharma. Wake the hell up

 

[francoHFW]

Something has to be done to fix the disaster we are in now

Which isn't to say that "anything" should be done. Or to imply that "anything" is better than nothing. Doing something that would make things worse, for example, should NOT be done.

What's done is worse I had good insurance before Obamacare

It was probably about to crash anyway... Hi deductibles and catastrophic coverage was just the way things were going. You were probably due for a downgrade... The problem in the US is out of control costs. Thanks GOP!

Now I have high premiums High deductibles and no coverage

A catastrophic plan would have been cheaper, but they need your money to pay for all the mooching deadbeats.

B*******. It It doesn't cost much more then than the old GOP scam go bankrupt or die

 

[basquebromance]

its the private health system that makes america's health care spending so expensive!

we go to the doctor much less than the Japanese or Indians, yet we pay much more

 

[healthmyths]

Remember the 1946 Tort Reform act says you can't sue doctors on government payroll.
Consequently less than half the doctors practice defensive medicine as they KNOW they won't get sued.

But non-government physicians 92% order duplicate tests, etc. practice defensive medicine and the COST is paid by the insurance companies as they simply raise the premiums.
Remember all insurance companies are regulated by states.

All states require companies to have reserves for future claims.

Reserves come from premiums that aren't used to pay claims...
(average insurance company pays out about 80% of premiums in claims...
i.e. defensive medicine included) and of the balance of 20% revenue pays salaries,etc.

AND then if any profits add to reserves... and then any profits left out of the 6% after salaries, etc., taxes reserves... Again a major reason many companies pulled out of Obamacare because the idiots forced companies to pay 85%...i.e. called medical liability ratio.
Left no money for profits which are used to build reserves required by states!

Very few doctors are on government payroll d u h

There are 32,468 medical doctors in all specialties employed throughout the federal government with positions available in many agencies.
Federal Physician Jobs | Working as a Physician at the VA

In 2013, there were over one million doctors of medicine all over the United States
Topic: Physicians

That works out to 3%.

So you are all in favor of lawyers causing nearly $850 billion a year in defensive medicine practices which add up to wasted expenses is that right?

 

[healthmyths]

its the private health system that makes america's health care spending so expensive!

we go to the doctor much less than the Japanese or Indians, yet we pay much more

Right. Where are your facts first?
Again defending lawyers? European health systems don't so why are you? $850 Billion a year. And you still are ok with that waste?

 

[basquebromance]

its the private health system that makes america's health care spending so expensive!

we go to the doctor much less than the Japanese or Indians, yet we pay much more

Right. Where are your facts first?
Again defending lawyers? European health systems don't so why are you? $850 Billion a year. And you still are ok with that waste?

you're not a "health care consumer", like you can go to Best Buy and buy a TV

WHAT DO WE WANT? SINGLE PLAYER! WHEN DO WE WANT IT? NOW!

 

[basquebromance]

all the money the health industry makes, that becomes political power

 

[healthmyths]

Remember the 1946 Tort Reform act says you can't sue doctors on government payroll.
Consequently less than half the doctors practice defensive medicine as they KNOW they won't get sued.

But non-government physicians 92% order duplicate tests, etc. practice defensive medicine and the COST is paid by the insurance companies as they simply raise the premiums.
Remember all insurance companies are regulated by states.

All states require companies to have reserves for future claims.

Reserves come from premiums that aren't used to pay claims...
(average insurance company pays out about 80% of premiums in claims...
i.e. defensive medicine included) and of the balance of 20% revenue pays salaries,etc.

AND then if any profits add to reserves... and then any profits left out of the 6% after salaries, etc., taxes reserves... Again a major reason many companies pulled out of Obamacare because the idiots forced companies to pay 85%...i.e. called medical liability ratio.
Left no money for profits which are used to build reserves required by states!

85% for group, 80% for individual plans.

Prior to the passage of the ACA, the majority of insurers were within the 80 percent MLR range.
However, roughly one-third of insurers in the individual market were required to make some changes in order comply with the new rule.

Between 2011, when the rule went into effect, and 2013, the median MLR in the individual market increased by 2.4 percent,
while in the small and large group markets the median MLRs increased by 0.4 percent and 0.1 percent, respectively.

This shows a moderate shift in spending away from administrative expenses and profit, and towards provision of care in the individual market to comply with the rule, but less of an impact in the small and large group markets which were largely already in compliance.
This could be an indication that individual market plans previously offered insurers exceptionally high profits,
that these insurers found ways of limiting administrative expenses,
or that the insurers who were unable to adapt to the rule left markets where their profit margins would be substantially impacted by the rule.

The MLR rule puts pressure on insurers to limit administrative overhead in order to preserve profit without running afoul of the MLR minimum.
Insurers may achieve this new goal by reducing expenditures on fraud protection measures, limiting “quality improvement” activities to those that satisfy the ACA requirements, limiting networks to reduce administrative burden, or shifting to more managed care-style plans which require care providers to take on responsibility for more administrative duties.

The inherent limitation on corporate revenues could also contribute to consolidation in the insurance market by discouraging investors and new entrants.
Without the ability to rapidly recoup start-up costs, competition with already-established players in a market is less likely to prove financially worthwhile.
The reduced number of insurance carriers entering new markets since 2011 may, in part, be attributed to this market restriction.

CONCLUSION
As one economist put it, “The Medical Loss Ratio is an accounting monstrosity, a convolution of data from myriad products, distribution channels, and geographical regions that enthralls the unsophisticated observer and distorts policy discourse.”[2]
Medical Loss Ratio Under the ACA - AAF

 

[healthmyths]

Yea that "EVIL" profit that evil companies make! That profit that pays federal/state/local taxes.
That "EVIL" profit that is distributed to evil shareholders like 401ks, mutual funds, etc....dividends that are ALSO taxed again.
Those "EVIL" profits that allow evil companies to grow hire more people, spend on construction... yea EVIL profits.