Shoutbox

Refresh History
  • littlebit: Makes sense.
    July 16, 2017, 04:40:28 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Boards will stay open for a place people can find history information longer. I am not allowing anyone to sign up for now because of so many foreginers just wanting to promote their business..
    December 10, 2016, 05:10:27 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Not sure why didn't look, I may be shutting down these message boards..
    November 17, 2016, 12:42:43 AM
  • ~kathy~: rick why is the timestamp showing up a day in advance?
    September 13, 2016, 12:27:46 AM
  • Valor7: What I tried to say is that the actual money would not be there that quick. But a loan against that would work if they are willing to do that.
    August 08, 2016, 01:51:51 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Why so long before it comes online? 911 took out a loan or bond with the known guarantee payment and began building..
    August 08, 2016, 07:46:34 AM
  • Valor7: Actually no it is not, a dependable Revenue stream will not come on line until the 4th quarter of 2017 so 2018 budget will be up in the air, not quite sure what they will have. By 2019 budget all will be well.
    August 04, 2016, 09:27:17 PM
  • Valor7: You mean that tax that the Commissioners would not put on the ballot for so many years? Strange things happened when the citizens got a chance to vote on that issue.
    August 03, 2016, 06:43:06 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Back up is now available withe the new tax..
    August 03, 2016, 05:01:35 PM
  • Valor7: Thanks a lot Ladies!!
    July 29, 2016, 01:16:13 PM
  • littlebit: ((*(*&
    July 27, 2016, 03:47:52 PM
  • ~kathy~: lol
    July 15, 2016, 09:34:56 AM
  • Valor7: A guy could get killed around here while waiting for backup!
    July 13, 2016, 07:31:58 PM
  • Lepard LLC: You are not alone..
    July 13, 2016, 07:28:53 PM
  • Valor7: I just hate it when I talk to myself!!!!
    July 08, 2016, 12:54:09 PM
  • Valor7: I could have worded that better, we talked details, options, the pros and cons of each, in  order to arrive at the best ballot language to present to the voters. Hope that makes this clearer.
    April 15, 2016, 06:36:14 PM
  • Valor7: sorry about the typos still working with just one arm in action
    April 13, 2016, 01:10:42 PM
  • Valor7: Yes and no. We talked details and options until we were blue in the face but I never heardbring it over, it was always the time was not right for the issue to pass. Glad to see the time in now right and I for one shall vote yes on the ballot. I would urge all others to do the sameour county is busting at the seams crimewise and no matter how many bad guys we send off there always seems to someone to replace them. The Sheriff's Office needs the help.
    April 13, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Is that true Valor? Did he ask you what you wanted?
    March 01, 2016, 04:55:37 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Gene Newkirk Rick I have waited for a Sheriff to bring it to me on what he wanted. I have pushed Mr long for a while to get it to me. He told me he was close to having or done. Now hopefully the people will get to decide on it. I spoke with Steve about this a few times.
    March 01, 2016, 04:54:54 AM
  • Kimberly: Wow- I have a new name..........
    February 23, 2016, 10:25:15 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Works on mine, improvements are being done here. I may kick back into her a lot and post but working on different technologies right now. Seeing how things interact.
    January 18, 2016, 09:01:20 AM
  • Valor7: Yes it is working. If you need a laugh the wife showed me how to correctly use the silly thing.
    January 04, 2016, 05:32:59 PM
  • Valor7: Think so, mine is trying to work but it is now user and password protected and I dont know mine
    December 17, 2015, 01:32:16 PM
  • "DJ": Is there still a working android app for the PCSD
    December 14, 2015, 08:14:53 PM

Author Topic: Insurance Premium (healthcare) Reform - Will your choice's be taken away?  (Read 18128 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile

Share/Bookmark

Fort Wood Hotel

Boards

Devils Elbow

Attractions

Sports

St. Robert

Waynesville

PC Daily

Dixon

Menu Guide

Fun Links

Homework

Crocker

Fort Wood

Swedeborg

Big Piney

Laquey

Classifieds

Restaurants

Richland

Fort  Hotels

Another part of the insurance premium reform (again, I call it that because the bill does nothing about healthcare costs or reform, it is all about what is paid for insurance) is people talking about their choices of insurance and insurance plans being taken away.

The President has said many times that if you are happy with your current plan, nobody is going to make you change plans.  While that is not totally true (and is not totally true as things are currently), overall it will surprise people to know that I think he is telling the truth.  In the portion I don't feel is totally true, I don't feel he is meaning to mislead, it is somewhat "splitting hairs".

First, the part where I said that statement is not totally true and is not as things are currently.  Currently, if you have insurance through your employer and that employer changes the companies plan, then you have to change, so yes you can currently be forced into another plan unless you can afford something else on your own and want to spend the money.

The same would be true under the proposed bills in DC.  Any bill that contains the public provider or sometimes call exchanges will offer insurance coverage through the government's company (they don't call it a company but it serves the exact same functions of an insurance company).  Under the current bills, employers are required to provide healthcare coverage to those that work for them.  If they don't, they are fined a dollar amount based on the pay of the employee and then the employee is put into the public plan unless you wish to pay for a private plan out of your own pocket.  Now, if the employer decides that the public plan costs them less than the private plan, regardless of coverage, they have the right to drop the private plan that you may be happy with, pay the "fine" (better known as premiums) to the federal government and push you into the public plan.  Again, they have the option of pushing you where they want now, they just don't have the option of what will probably be a discounted plan provided by the federal government.  So, in this case the President is correct, he is not making you change but you can be forced to change by your employer.

The other portion that must be considered is the purpose of the public plan that the President has talked about.  He has said many times that the purpose of the public plan he supports is not only to be an avenue for those without a plan, but to also make the public insurance companies compete, in his opinion making their rates lower so they can compete with the government insurance company.

Remember, almost nothing in the plan lowers the cost of healthcare, what a doctor charges, what a hospital charges, what costs they have to places where they must buy their medical malpractice insurance, no lowering of costs on legal fees, etc...  While private insurance companies I know for a fact can cut some of their profits and still survive, because their expenses are fixed there is only so far they can go and still be in business and that range is not as far as some probably think.

But give this some thought, and please read it with an open mind....

Tomorrow morning the President (let's pretend a Republican President just to make it interesting) gets out of bed and says to himself "I really think American Family  Insurance is the best in the nation, how all others ought to be".  (I pick them for no reason other than they popped into my head and I have no past or present affiliation with them).  So, the President sets for a mandate that says:
     
  • American Family Insurance will write all of the policies and regulations for all insurance companies in the nation.
  • American Family Insurance will have the job of auditing, examining, and fining all insurance companies in the nation.
  • American Family Insurance will examine all aspects of the business practices of all insurance companies in the nation.
  • American Family Insurance will determine what coverage is required of all insurance companies in the nation.
  • American Family Insurance will no longer have to show a profit and will have the funding of the United States Government behind them during difficult economic times.
  • American Family Insurance will be allowed to collect some of the profits of all insurance companies in the nation to help run their own internal operation and offset their own costs.

I am curious how many would feel that is fair business practice for insurance companies in America.  I also wonder how many would think that any company other than American Family Insurance could survive in that type of business environment, since American Family Insurance can use other companiesí profits to run their own operation and regulate all other.

For those that think I am off of the deep end on this analogy, think about it.  The U.S. Government does all of the things I mentioned above to include taking some of the profits to run on (taxes).  Please tell me what private company can compete with the United States Government and stay in business?  I will argue nobody.  With the public provider option, private companies will be competing with the very folks that do all of the things above, the U.S. Government, not to mention that the U.S. Government does not have to show a profit, efficiency, has unlimited backing (our tax dollars and the U.S. Mint).

Again, the President said you can keep your plan if you like it, he is telling the truth as long as they are in business and you can afford it.  I will contend that they will not survive long, thus taking your choice.  But...you were not forced.  I do think there will be one or two high-end insurance companies that will survive for the Hollywood types, Bill Gates, Donald Trump, etc... type who have huge resources and of course you will have some of the very wealthy that simply pay for their care on their own.  They will continue to receive better care than the rest, that will not change as long as money counts for anything.

I have a little knowledge of the insurance industry and can assure you that any insurance company going up against the federal government competing for customers will not survive very long.  It would be like me as an individual setting up a dime store next to Wal-Mart or a bait shop next to Bass Pro.  Not very likely to succeed.

So no, I don't think the President is going to make you move, he is telling you the truth.  However, the example above is a very real one and you can decide for yourself how long your choices will remain and how many choices you will have.  Also remember, I know many like and trust this President and Congress on this board, but with election changes come changes in all government policy.  If you have been entered into the public plan either by one of the scenarios I gave above or on  your own, will you like your coverage under all of the administrations in the future?  You have to decide that.

Like the other post, this is just information that I know to be true as the bills are written.  The public provider portion is the biggest concern of the self-named Blue Dog Democrats for the EXACT reasons I stated.  To say I am being dishonest about these concerns means you are calling them dishonest also.

Just something to think about, is this type of large plan what is needed to address insurance costs or should the reason for the costs, healthcare costs be addressed?  You may feel this is great and like the idea...that is your right.

Dave
 
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline CriTTer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1255
  • Karma: +523099/-9200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
from my understanding we will have plenty of AFFORDABLE options to choose from
 
  its seems our propaganda posters TokyoFish and TokyoSnot have been spamming PCW with so much *** drivel of late i thought i might set the record straight on some of the lies.
  One of those lies is that they say that if Health care reform is passed then we as Americans will not have a choice of what kind of Health care we want.  In fact most of the people at these meetings seem to think the same thing.  But it is far from the truth.  One of the campaign promises promised by our President was to "Create a National Health Insurance Exchange' and being true to his word he made sure this was placed on the Health care reform bill  HR3200 and it states as follows:
 
After months of talking about health care reform, the U.S. House of Representatives introduced major legislation to overhaul the nation's health care system. House Democrats unveiled the 1,000-plus-page bill, called America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, on July 14, and it includes most of President Barack Obama's key proposals on health reform.

One of Obama's promises was to create a national health insurance exchange. He envisioned people being able to one-stop shop for health insurance, with benefits and coverage spelled out in clear, standardized language.

The House bill creates the National Insurance Exchange under a Health Choices Administration, with a commissioner to run it named by the president. The Health Choices commissioner "establishes a process through which to obtain bids, negotiate and enter into contracts with qualified plans, and ensure that the different levels of benefits are offered with appropriate oversight and enforcement," according to a summary of the legislation from the House Ways and Means Committee.
so you see the cries of socialized health care are unfounded and U S citizens will have choices to choose from and not a "take it or leave it " plan like the Sabators want you to believe

Offline CriTTer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1255
  • Karma: +523099/-9200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    Dave ....tell me what you see is bad about these key priniples...... The key principles of legislation include, among other things:
Increasing choice and competition.  First, the bill will protect and improve consumers' choices. 
  • If an individual likes their current plan, they will be able to keep it.  For individuals who either aren't currently covered, or wanted to enroll in a new health care plan, the proposal will establish a health care exchange where consumers can select from a menu of affordable, quality health care options: either a new public health insurance plan or a plan offered by private insurers. People will have similar choices that members of Congress have.  This new marketplace will reduce costs, create competition that leads to better care for every American, and keep private insurers honest. Patients and doctors will have control over decisions about their health care, instead of insurance companies.
Giving Americans peace of mind.  Second, the legislation will ensure that Americans have portable, secure health care plans - so that they won't lose care if their employer drops their plan or they lose their job. 
  • Every American who receives coverage through the exchange will have a plan that includes standardized, comprehensive and quality health care benefits.  It will end increases in premiums or denials of care based on pre-existing conditions, age, race, or gender.  The proposal will also eliminate co-pays for preventative care, cap out-of-pocket expenses, and guarantee catastrophic coverage that protects every American from bankruptcy.
Improving quality of care for every American.  Third, the legislation will ensure that Americans of all ages, from young children to retirees have access to greater quality of care by focusing on prevention, wellness, and strengthening programs that work. 
  • Guarantees that every child in America will have health care coverage that includes dental and vision benefits.  Provides better preventative and wellness care. Every health care plan offered through the exchange will cover preventative care.  Grows the health care workforce to ensure that more doctors and nurses are available to provide quality care as more Americans get coverage.  Strengthens Medicare and Medicaid so that seniors and low-income Americans receive better quality of care and see lower prescription drug costs and out-of-pocket expenses.
Ensuring shared responsibility.  Fourth, the bill will ensure that individuals, employers, and the federal government all share responsibility for a quality and affordable health care system. 
  • Employers who currently offer coverage will be able to continue offering coverage to workers. Employers who don't currently offer coverage could choose to cover their workers or pay a penalty.  All individuals would be required to get coverage, either through their employer or the exchange, or pay a penalty.  The federal government will provide affordability credits, available on a sliding scale for low- and middle-income individuals and families to make premiums affordable and reduce cost-sharing.
Protecting consumers and reducing waste, fraud, and abuse.  Fifth, the legislation will put the interests of consumers first, protect them from any problems in getting and keeping health care coverage, and reduce waste, fraud, and abuse. 
  • Provides complete transparency in plans in the health exchange so that consumers have the clear, complete information needed to select the plan that best meets their needs.  Establishes Consumer Advocacy Offices as part of the exchange in order to protect consumers, answer questions, and assist with any problems related to their plans.  Will identify and eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse by simplifying paperwork and other administrative burdens. Patients, doctors, nurses, insurance companies, providers, and employers will all encounter a streamlined, less confusing, more consumer friendly system.

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
The only thing this thread deals with is will people have a choice.  Please read what I posted, it is a answer to the portion you posted called "Increasing choice and competition", your first bullet point in your paste.  It explains why I think choices will not be out there very long.  What you posted is somebody's opinion, I don't know who but I might be willing to bet that I have as much of an understanding of the insurance industry as whoever they are does.  Maybe not.  No matter, that is their opinion and I am posting mine.

IF what you posted is what would actually happen, then there is nothing wrong with most of it.  However, nothing you posted here or anywhere else that I have seen explains how any company in our nation can compete with the federal government and stay in business.  Please explain that to me, I don't think you or anyone else can because I don't think it can happen.  If it could be explained, I think the President or Congress would have by now and frankly the bill would have passed already since that is the big problem the Democrats that have kept the bill from getting out of committee have with it.

This information is also why the self-named Blue Dog DEMOCRATS are fighting the bill.  They understand that a government ran insurance company (public option) will do, eliminate other insurance companies, and as they leave, so do choices.

With all due respect, you are relying on "because they said so" as your basis for supporting this bill. I am asking people to think for themselves, answer the question I put in the original post about competition, ask yourself how your private insurance company can compete with the federal government, they can't.  Government will win everytime if the goal is competition, as the President has said.

If that is good with you, so be it.  But you really need to read the post and answer the real questions in your own mind, and again I would say read the bill, or what the CBO says about it or what the Blue Dogs say about it.  Then decide for yourself.  But "just because someone said" is not a good reason at all, be it me or anyone else saying it.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
BTW, if I understand your first post correctly, you are saying the blue print is from the bill.  If that is what you are saying, that is not correct, if not, my mistake and misunderstanding.  Either way, that is not the type of language you will ever find in legislation anywhere I am aware of.  While I don't know the source, it appears to also be someone opinion or their view of a summary.

Anyone can post their view just as I do, that doesn't make it right.  Again, people should think for themselves but I gave a very real analogy of the business model that a government option will present in the insurance industry.  Decide for yourself if you could run a private insurance business that could compete with someone else selling the same policies but have all of the advantages I mentioned above.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline CriTTer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1255
  • Karma: +523099/-9200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
here is the link to the info.....its from politifact.com which is part of the st.petersburg times news paper   http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/52/create-a-national-health-insurance-exchange/ 
 
they follow all the campaign promises of pres obama , yes even the broken ones...
this is a site that  one of the "Tokyo Crew" had used before and i followed the link from them.
 
my 2nd post was from the  house of reps committee on energy and commerce
http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1706:house-democrats-introduce-bill-to-provide-quality-affordable-health-care-for-all-americans&catid=122:media-advisories&Itemid=55   i think they would be more reputable to quote then others dont ya think ?

Offline CriTTer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1255
  • Karma: +523099/-9200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
The only thing this thread deals with is will people have a choice.  Please read what I posted, it is a answer to the portion you posted called "Increasing choice and competition", your first bullet point in your paste.  It explains why I think choices will not be out there very long.  What you posted is somebody's opinion, I don't know who but I might be willing to bet that I have as much of an understanding of the insurance industry as whoever they are does.  Maybe not.  No matter, that is their opinion and I am posting mine.

IF what you posted is what would actually happen, then there is nothing wrong with most of it.  However, nothing you posted here or anywhere else that I have seen explains how any company in our nation can compete with the federal government and stay in business.  Please explain that to me, I don't think you or anyone else can because I don't think it can happen.  If it could be explained, I think the President or Congress would have by now and frankly the bill would have passed already since that is the big problem the Democrats that have kept the bill from getting out of committee have with it.

This information is also why the self-named Blue Dog DEMOCRATS are fighting the bill.  They understand that a government ran insurance company (public option) will do, eliminate other insurance companies, and as they leave, so do choices.

With all due respect, you are relying on "because they said so" as your basis for supporting this bill. I am asking people to think for themselves, answer the question I put in the original post about competition, ask yourself how your private insurance company can compete with the federal government, they can't.  Government will win everytime if the goal is competition, as the President has said.

If that is good with you, so be it.  But you really need to read the post and answer the real questions in your own mind, and again I would say read the bill, or what the CBO says about it or what the Blue Dogs say about it.  Then decide for yourself.  But "just because someone said" is not a good reason at all, be it me or anyone else saying it.

Dave
  where do you get that the will have to compete with the goverment?
  all i have read and seen shows that companies will compete amongst themselves( just as they have been } but would have to promote themselves to the Health Choices commissioner who "establishes a process through which to obtain bids, negotiate and enter into contracts with qualified plans, and ensure that the different levels of benefits are offered with appropriate oversight and enforcement,"

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
Again, with respect...you have not answered the question of how your private insurance company can compete with the federal government.  If they can't, your choice is gone, or at least that choice is gone.  The posts you have submitted and the links you have given also don't answer that at all.  Your second link, that report is not released without the approval of the Chairman of that committee, who supports the bill and has a great deal of political libability hanging on it, so I do think it is very bias, probably much more than the newspapers.

This thread is not about if the program is good or bad or even if someone supports it.  It is simply asking the question, will you continue to have a choice.  Posting something that simply says "your choices will remain" is no different than me posting something that says "your choices will all be gone".

ASK YOURSELF (not other websites, links, talking points, etc... of either side of the argument) how can a private business compete with the federal government and stay in business.  Again, I will post what I did in the first post:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
But give this some thought, and please read it with an open mind....

Tomorrow morning the President (let's pretend a Republican President just to make it interesting) gets out of bed and says to himself "I really think American Family  Insurance is the best in the nation, how all others ought to be".  (I pick them for no reason other than they popped into my head and I have no past or present affiliation with them).  So, the President sets for a mandate that says:
     
American Family Insurance will write all of the policies and regulations for all insurance companies in the nation.
American Family Insurance will have the job of auditing, examining, and fining all insurance companies in the nation.
American Family Insurance will examine all aspects of the business practices of all insurance companies in the nation.
American Family Insurance will determine what coverage is required of all insurance companies in the nation.
American Family Insurance will no longer have to show a profit and will have the funding of the United States Government behind them during difficult economic times.
American Family Insurance will be allowed to collect some of the profits of all insurance companies in the nation to help run their own internal operation and offset their own costs.

I am curious how many would feel that is fair business practice for insurance companies in America.  I also wonder how many would think that any company other than American Family Insurance could survive in that type of business environment, since American Family Insurance can use other companies profits to run their own operation and regulate all other.

For those that think I am off of the deep end on this analogy, think about it.  The U.S. Government does all of the things I mentioned above to include taking some of the profits to run on (taxes).  Please tell me what private company can compete with the United States Government and stay in business?  I will argue nobody.  With the public provider option, private companies will be competing with the very folks that do all of the things above, the U.S. Government, not to mention that the U.S. Government does not have to show a profit, efficiency, has unlimited backing (our tax dollars and the U.S. Mint).
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not with a cut/paste, not with talking points, but in YOUR words, answer how a private business can survive in that business climate please.  I can read cut/paste stuff anytime I want, those opinions are out there for everyone, YOUR opinions are not.  Don't rely on others for your answers, give it some thought and try to explain how your insurance company can stay in business under this very real scenario.

Now, if someone says they can't survive but they don't care because the feel government can do it better, while I disagree...that is fine, that is their opinion.  I am simply putting forthe the argument that I don't see how choices will remain in the market place under the public option or exchange options.  AND again, that is also why the Democrats in DC can't get the bill out of committee or votes on the floors, because other Democrats agree.

YOUR thoughts, not that of other sites please.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
  where do you get that the will have to compete with the government?
  all i have read and seen shows that companies will compete amongst themselves( just as they have been } but would have to promote themselves to the Health Choices commissioner who "establishes a process through which to obtain bids, negotiate and enter into contracts with qualified plans, and ensure that the different levels of benefits are offered with appropriate oversight and enforcement,"

Critter... the public option is a government ran place where people can go to get their insurance, that is the basis for the whole plan.  They have said that it is intended for those that can't afford insurance and anyone else that wants a different option.  If you can afford to pay something, you pay your premium to them and they have your insurance for you.  That is an insurance company, and as far as competing, that has been the President's words.

It also clearly says that if employers don't provide coverage, they pay a percent of payroll and then the workers are put in the public plan.  Well...if the percent of payroll is cheaper than the current plan, many employers will drop the plan, pay the percent of payroll and put the worker in the public plan.  Why, because the government plan cost them less.

The basis of the bill according to the President has been the competion.  That is where I get that idea.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay


Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
where do you get that they are to compete with the federal gov ?   i never seen anything that says the have to..   

Economics 101 Critter.  If you are selling something and I start selling the same product, you are in competion with me, doesnt matter if you want to be or not, until one of us goes out of business.  That is the whole Public Option portion.  AGAIN, that is why it can't pass out of committee or the chambers, this is the part that even the Democrats are concerned about.
 
I guess I would ask you, from what you have been told...do you agree that the government will be suppling insurance to those that can't afford it or don't have insurance in other places, thus making insurance available to everyone?  If your answer is yes, then that is where the competion comes from, them being in the business also.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
OK, ate lunch...all is better now.

Critter (or whoever), the number one, by far, stumbling block for this legislation has been the concern that private insurance companies could not survive against the federal government.  That is why you hear people saying that their choices will be taken away, I am sure you have heard that.  While many in government have said your choices will not go away, nobody to my knowledge has ever said that government will not be in competition, again, that is be basis of the bill.

BUT...if there is no competition with the federal government, which would mean that private companies would not go away because of that...don't you think someone would have said by now that there would be no competition?  Even your post above Critter talks about that some.  Everyone can sign up for the public/government plan for a cost.  By that simple fact alone, they are in competition.

If that were addressed, the Blue Dogs would have voted for it and the President would have already signed it I am betting.

There is no doubt that there needs to be reform, but in many areas other than just this.  Insurance does need reform, no doubt, but if that is the only reform then you have done nothing to address the root problem, the cost of healthcare.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline CriTTer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1255
  • Karma: +523099/-9200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Dave in my words,  the insurace companies will have to be able to compete with the others companies to be able to survive...just like they do now
 if they cannot offer a plan equal of better then others then the will not survive.....same as it is now
american family may have to change a few things to stay competitive but as long as they do, they will survive,  if they cannot they will go under......just as it is now
i think you use the term "going thru the goverment" to loosely.
     If they keep their fees as low as the others and provide the same or better coverage as other companies they will do fine....if they cannot they will go under, but the people who were insured with them will still have plenty of affordable choices to choose from.
   nothing socialist about it.  just change in how it is to be promoted which will have companies  fighting harder for your business. 
 
  from what i read in the bill there is to be "health benefit planS....under the health insurance exchange... not a 1 plan option like you think there is going to be.
  we will have companies competing with in the exchange as well as private companies outside the exchange... if those companies competing within the excange can drive the prices down, i would think prive companies outside the exchange will have to follow suit... i see nothing wrong with that.....more choices more options and lower rates for bettor coverage.....its win win for all.
 
  will not be a gov OWNED company but companies competeing under the eye of the gov to provide afforable health care. many companys not just one.  who is to say American Family cnnot be one of those with in the exchange offerring services to a "national" audience?
 

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
Dave in my words,  the insurace companies will have to be able to compete with the others companies to be able to survive...just like they do now
 if they cannot offer a plan equal of better then others then the will not survive.....same as it is now
american family may have to change a few things to stay competitive but as long as they do, they will survive,  if they cannot they will go under......just as it is now
i think you use the term "going thru the goverment" to loosely.
     If they keep their fees as low as the others and provide the same or better coverage as other companies they will do fine....if they cannot they will go under, but the people who were insured with them will still have plenty of affordable choices to choose from.
   nothing socialist about it.  just change in how it is to be promoted which will have companies  fighting harder for your business. 
 
  from what i read in the bill there is to be "health benefit planS....under the health insurance exchange... not a 1 plan option like you think there is going to be.
  we will have companies competing with in the exchange as well as private companies outside the exchange... if those companies competing within the excange can drive the prices down, i would think prive companies outside the exchange will have to follow suit... i see nothing wrong with that.....more choices more options and lower rates for bettor coverage.....its win win for all

If the government was not going to be providing insurance, the bill would already be law.  When the President talks about the "public option", that is an option for any of the public to enter into, that is not a private company.  That provision is why the Democrats that disagree/fear it have held it up.  If you have listened to the news, that is the number one and by far biggest stumbling block.  The fear of eliminating private companies.  So if it is not there as you suggest, I would recommend telling all of the folks in DC to say that, then they can pass it.  They won't, because it is in there AND the President has said that he won't sign a bill that does not contain it.  They won't use words like I do, things like "government insurance companies", government uses more broad terms like "alternative to private options", or "public alternative", things like that.  Not saying those exact terms are in it, but that is in general how government writes bills, so they are not locked in by specific words. 

I agree with your assessment that companies compete with others now and the good survive and the bad either change or die.  That is business and IF there is no government subsidy, that is the way the market works.  I love it, the way it should work.  We agree on that.

In my analogy, I was using American Family in place of the government plan that will be in place.  In that analogy, actually American Family will not have to change anything, they would be writing ALL of the rules, just as government does now.  The difference is, while the government writes the rules now, they are not selling health insurance (other than the medicaid, medicare for special brackets of people) so they are not competing for people who want to buy insurance.

You say "if they keep their fees as low", that is exactally right.  If the private insurance companies can keep their fees as low as the government plan, they can stay in business.  We agree on that also.  Now, this is where if you understand being in business, and I am betting you probably do, you know that any business has expenses.  They have some money coming in from customers and they have some money going out for expenses.  To stay in business, they need more coming in than going out, at least long term.  I hope we still agree so far.

As long as competing business have similar opportunities for customers and somewhat equal expenses, they can compete against each other, just like the marketplace does now.  Do we still agree?  If one company has the ability for some reason to not have the same expenses, and can cut their expenses greatly, they can lower what they have to charge and will win the race for customers, thus running out others in that business.  Do you agree with that (just trying to figure out where we start disagreeing)?

That is the concern.  No matter how you slice it, government does not have the expenses in the same way a private insurance company does.  Your insurance company has investors, a board of directors and people that employees must be accountable to, to be able to show profits.  No profit, no business remains because unlike tax dollars in government, this is money of people like you and I, private citizens.  Once that money is gone, the business is gone because once we are out of money, we are out.

In contrast, the Government (who BTW takes some of the private insurance companies profits in taxes to run their own insurance company), government has no history of effency, has never had a program that turned a profit (even when post offices were the ONLY game in town, they lost money) and has literally unlimited resources to withstand massive losses in the insurance business without going out of business.  The government may have overhead like private businesses, but their resources and regulatory authority is unlimited, that is not true at all of business.  Government has a HUGE, unfair advantage that nobody or no company can compete with and withstand.  That is my argument.
 
I am not saying that  you should say this is a bid idea, that is your call.  I am saying that people need to understand how fair or unfair the competion will be with the government providing health insurance.  That is all, people need to understand what will be going on and what the possibilities are.

I am doing a very poor job of trying to make my point, that is obvious by you not understanding what I am trying to say.  I am not saying you should agree, but I don't think I am getting my point across.  Just look at it this way, do you believe bigger can sell for less normally?  Wal-Mart vs local drug store type of thing?  Just imagine Wal-Mart against the local drug store but in addition to being huge, they have the legal ability to print any money they need, tell the local drug store how to conduct their business, and at the end of the year take 20% of the drug store's profits to keep for themselves.  I don't know how to explain the unfairness of the competeion better than that.  If that didn't work, I can't think of anything else.  That is my failing.  Sorry.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline CriTTer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1255
  • Karma: +523099/-9200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
i agree with most of what you say dave and you are right...i dont get a chance to watch the news on tv and rely alot on what i read when i have time to read it.
  one of those things i read was the obama wants companies to "bid" for people to use there services under there watchful eye , which is where the health care exchange comes in. It is basicly a "new marketplace" where consumers can select from a menu of affordable, quality health care options: either a new public health insurance plan or a plan offered by private insurers. People will have similar choices that members of Congress have.   If this is true then i am 100% for it.
  i can see where people may get the wrong idea and think the goverment will be selling the insurance instead of just "governing" on how these companies do bussiness.   but i have not seen news about those concerns

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
i agree with most of what you say dave and you are right...i dont get a chance to watch the news on tv and rely alot on what i read when i have time to read it.
  one of those things i read was the obama wants companies to "bid" for people to use there services under there watchful eye , which is where the health care exchange comes in. It is basicly a "new marketplace" where consumers can select from a menu of affordable, quality health care options: either a new public health insurance plan or a plan offered by private insurers. People will have similar choices that members of Congress have.   If this is true then i am 100% for it.
  i can see where people may get the wrong idea and think the goverment will be selling the insurance instead of just "governing" on how these companies do bussiness.   but i have not seen news about those concerns


Critter, read what you just typed, I am sorry but you just made my point exactly.  You typed the words "either a new public health insurance plan or..."  Who controls the "new public health insurance plan"?  It is the government.  You just said in a backdoor way that the government will be in the insurance business.  They won't give it all away, so that means they are selling some of it (or I am sure the words will be more like contributing to the pool). 

Today, people have similar choices that Congress has, the question is can they afford it.  Most can't and most won't be able to under any of the new plans because the cost of medical care has not been addressed, and that is what drives the cost of insurance.

Anyway Critter, you just typed in those magic words, about a public option, which is an insurance plan funded by the government and those that participate in it.  That will be in competion with private companies.

Again, if you think that is good, that is fine.  But the private companes can never compete with the "new public health insurance plan".

I do appreciate the conservation and equally appreciate your thoughts instead of cut/paste that is so popular on here sometimes.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline CriTTer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1255
  • Karma: +523099/-9200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
that part was cut and paste from above.   my second post .  from the house of rep web site
 
Increasing choice and competition.  First, the bill will protect and improve consumers' choices.   
  • If an individual likes their current plan, they will be able to keep it.  For individuals who either aren't currently covered, or wanted to enroll in a new health care plan, the proposal will establish a health care exchange where consumers can select from a menu of affordable, quality health care options: either a new public health insurance plan or a plan offered by private insurers. People will have similar choices that members of Congress have.  This new marketplace will reduce costs, create competition that leads to better care for every American, and keep private insurers honest. Patients and doctors will have control over decisions about their health care, instead of insurance companies.
 

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
Well, while I think that post is very slanted to the positive (BTW, it would be the other way if a Republican was chairman, just the way it works...that is not a slam but a simple fact of how it works), even in their own writings the are rightfully admitting that there will be an alternative to private insurance plans like you and I have now, it will be a "new public health insurance plan".

I wish I would have noticed that sooner, that is my point and I wasted a lot of time trying to explain what I was doing a poor job of.  Government, by their words, will be providing an alternative to private insurance, which will be competition for private plans, with all of the power and backing of the United States Government.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline CriTTer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1255
  • Karma: +523099/-9200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
dave does the state of missouri give you insurance?  and if you dont mind what company is it under?

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
I do want to address the statement that is in there also that says:

" Patients and doctors will have control over decisions about their health care, instead of insurance companies."

Currently decisions are between patients and doctors...period.  Now, if you want to talk about what insurance companies are going to pay for, that is an entirely different issue.  For what you pay for, it will always be between you and your doctor.

For what insurance companies pay for will always be between you, your doctor, and your insurance company, with the insurance company having the heavy vote.  That will continue to be the case.  The decision will be with your insurance company  involved OR with the government involved, but no matter what plan you go with, whoever is paying the bill and approving the procedures will ALWAYS have a vote in what happens.  There seems to be some illusion that under the new plan, if you want a procedure, you get it.  That is not true now and never will be, there is no way this nation could afford that for a month.

Just a thought.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
dave does the state of missouri give you insurance?  and if you dont mind what company is it under?

My insurance is through a company called Mercy, that is who the State of MO contracted with this year.  I pay for it through the state and get the state employee rate.
 
My family doctor does not accept Mercy so it is of little good other than if there was something major, my doctor office visits are out of my pocket.  I also pay for coverage from the eye doctor (can't spell what they are really called...lol).

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline CriTTer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1255
  • Karma: +523099/-9200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
My insurance is through a company called Mercy, that is who the State of MO contracted with this year.  I pay for it through the state so I can get the state employee rate.

Dave
  so mercy probably was in competiton with others to get the bid to offer insurance and won, correct?   
  This is what i see when i read what i posted.  it is not a plan owned by the state but a company who gave the best bid.
  from what i read companies will be able to do this with the us gov under a health commision as well as having private companys to pick from. 

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
You are correct, they bid what the state said they wanted covered and was awarded the bid based on their price.  Their price was based on what their expenses are and what they thought they could profit from the business.

My point, do you think that Mercy could have won that bid if the federal government were bidding also OR just simply had a plan available to move to that costs less?  Who do you think can work on less profit?  The answer of course is the federal government with their "new public health insurance plan".  The government has never in history, nor do they now, have to show a profit...period.  Mercy does, they have a board of directors that expects a profit for their investors, so their bid will be higher.

Who can work and provide services and goods for a less amount?  Someone who must show a profit or someone who does not care how much money they loose?  That is how you can decide if the competition is fair and by the very words that you posted, there will be a public plan which is an alternative to a private plan.  Private is a company funded by investors, public is one funded by the government (tax dollars).

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
If the government is not going to be in the insurance business as you claim and it will only be private companies under the "watchful" eye of the government, please explain why they refer to both a "public health insurance plan" and a "private insurance plan".  If they are all private and not government ran, why refer to the public plan?

I really am tired and am not getting my point across at all.  Gotta go outside, water some new trees and wonder why I can't seem to explain this.

Before I leave though, if the government is not going to be in the insurance business....why are the Blue Dog Democrats opposing this?  I mean, they should know the bill better than any of us and this is why they are saying they have been against it.  Why has not Polosi or the President told them the truth if government is not getting in the business?

Gotta break, trees want a drink (this will also make it rain I bet).

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline CriTTer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1255
  • Karma: +523099/-9200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
dave you need to show me where it says the goverment is going to sell insurance..not just speculation.  you might be right i dont know, but i need more then" this is what i believe" is gonna happen.   show me proof not just different twists to words that i have posted

Offline okie the thread killer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 4857
  • Karma: +2619917/-766
    • View Profile
With all due respect to both critter and rep. day, I think we would all be better off if the government would explain their plans. I don't know how anyone can wade thru the bills, and they will change lord knows how many times anyway...I am just an average citizen trying to keep up, and it is very difficult for me to wade thru all this stuff. At this point I am against it, because they can't explain it to me clearly.
I have it on good authority that the Hokey-Pokey really IS what it's all about.

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
dave you need to show me where it says the goverment is going to sell insurance..not just speculation.  you might be right i dont know, but i need more then" this is what i believe" is gonna happen.   show me proof not just different twists to words that i have posted

You posted the words, "new public health insurance plan".  If the government is NOT going to be running this new plan, who is?  Why would they call it a "new public health insurance plan" if it were going to be a private plan like people have now and like they refer to later in the bill?

They are saying that this plan, along with the private plans are going to be under the watchful eye of the government.  They are saying that very clearly, there are no twists.  They are telling you that you can enter into either plan you want, I honestly don't know know how it can be more clear.  Like I said, if the new public plan is not the governments, then does it belong to American Family, Farm Bureau, BC/BS?  No, it is the governments version of insurance.

I really can't say it more clear than what you posted yourself.  The other thing I will mention is, of the hundreds of discussions I have had on this, you are the first person of either side of the issue that has questioned the government being in the insurance business.  Not saying that is bad or wrong, but every other discussion I have had with people that both support and don't support this bill has been what will the effects be of the government being in the insurance business, will it hurt private companies or not (which was the original point of this thread). 

You are the first person I have met that questions if the government will be suppling an optional insurance plan or not.  You have a right to your opinion but again, the fact that Speaker Polosi and the President won't take the public option also known as the public insurance plan out is why the bill is stalled and the rest of the Democrats won't support it.  If you are correct and they are not getting in the business, then there would be little problem in passing it.
 
Lastly, I am guessing you have some respect for Sen. McCaskill.  When on FOX News just a few days ago she was asked if the government should be getting in the health insurance business.  Her reply was that we just have to look at how that will impact the industry, that she didn't want to take choices away or cost insurance companies jobs.  In no way at all did she deny that they would be in the insurance business in her comments, but rather expressed the same concerns I have and others.

As I said, I am doing a poor job of explaining but I just can't show you any better than what you posted yourself.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
With all due respect to both critter and rep. day, I think we would all be better off if the government would explain their plans. I don't know how anyone can wade thru the bills, and they will change lord knows how many times anyway...I am just an average citizen trying to keep up, and it is very difficult for me to wade thru all this stuff. At this point I am against it, because they can't explain it to me clearly.

That is a very good point.  The last press conference the President held on the issue most felt he was going to come out and explain the program and what he wanted in it.  With respect to one of the most gifted speakers I have heard, that press conference was a flop.  The support for the program dropped 6 points the next day because more people than ever were confused.

He has said what he will not take a bill without, this issue being one of them, but other than that, it is a muddy mess.  I don't blame him for much of that, the bill is not his yet, it belongs to the Senate and the House where different versions are in committees.  Their problem is the Democrats (the ones in charge of governing because of the majority) can't even get their own members to agree on a bill or even what is in it.  It is their bill and their duty to explain it to the public, but so far very little has been done.  They keep speaking in very vague terms, and anytime government of either party does that...run!

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline okie the thread killer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 4857
  • Karma: +2619917/-766
    • View Profile
Agreed, most definately!!!!
I have it on good authority that the Hokey-Pokey really IS what it's all about.

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
For anyone that gets FOX News and is interested, I just finished watching Mike Huckabee's show and it was all about this issue.  For those that have never watched him, I think he is probably one of the most fair people there is and is ALWAYS a gentleman.  This was a great show and he had Republicans and Democrats talking about the issues.

I noticed his show is on again at 10:00pm tonight.  While my menu does not tell me the topic, I am betting it will be the show I just watched playing again.  This is on DirecTV (channel 360) I am talking about, I assume others are the same rotation of shows.

Anyway, the very issues I have talked about on here are confirmed by both Democrats and Republicans.  Of course one party says it will work, the other doesn't, but overall there is more good information on this show with very limited spin from either side than I think I have seen anywhere.  Among those on there are President Obama's past doctor, Democrat Governor Ed Rendell, Democrat Congresswoman Sanchez (sp?) and some Republicans.

Anyway, just thought if you are interested and have access you might be interested.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay