Author Topic: AP: FACT CHECK: Health insurer profits not so fat  (Read 1201 times)

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5674
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Re: AP: FACT CHECK: Health insurer profits not so fat
« Reply #25 on: October 27, 2009, 01:39:13 PM »
Hedge, here's an example.

The government can remove the protective regulation that restricts people to buying insurance in their own state.  So, they can create a law that helps people by increasing competition, which will bring down rates.
Government can make it illegal to discriminate against people for pre-existing medical conditions.
Government can allow small businesses to group up into pools to buy insurance at group rates.
Gov can mandate that people can obtain insurance and then continue their coverage, even if they change jobs (whether they pay or the next company pays).

I am not hypocritical.  I want government to ensure fair practices by insurance companies and remove all inappropriate protections given.  I don't want government to run healthcare at all.  That's pretty clear I think...and not contradictory.

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
Re: AP: FACT CHECK: Health insurer profits not so fat
« Reply #26 on: October 27, 2009, 02:27:24 PM »
The government can remove the protective regulation that restricts people to buying insurance in their own state.  So, they can create a law that helps people by increasing competition, which will bring down rates.
Government can make it illegal to discriminate against people for pre-existing medical conditions.
Government can allow small businesses to group up into pools to buy insurance at group rates.
Gov can mandate that people can obtain insurance and then continue their coverage, even if they change jobs (whether they pay or the next company pays).



Eliminating the pre-existing conditions exclusion (which I support) will increase cost.  I don't think it requires an expert to recognize that.  Small businesses can already pool together at their local chamber of commerces, but that hasn't much helped.  But, your 3rd point makes me very skeptical.  Risk is risk.  The insurance company sees an overweight, 60 yr old smoker and they say it's going to cost "x" so we'll charge "y".  Just because the company can now insure that old, overweight smoker in another state, does not change the degree of risk.

Another reason I'm skeptical of this competition argument.  Working for the government, I have the opportunity to choose each year among 15 or so different plans.  15 different companies all vying for business.  Yet, in the last 6 years, ALL rates have gone up, I now have a $1500 dollar deductible (not a GB millionaire if you get my drift), most things now have a 20% co-pay when 6 years ago there was NONE, AND we've lost covered services.

15 companies in competition and NO lower rates, NO increased services, NO lower deductibles.

What you're proposing is a theory, a hope that something will occur.  But I keep seeing the reality and it's a far cry from the theory.  Something drastic needs to be done, it's just getting out of hand.