Author Topic: Expensive and crap= US healthcare  (Read 1938 times)


Emmortal

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5660
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #1 on: December 12, 2012, 06:45:17 PM »
Did this really need a thread? This is already well known.

GigantorX

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6370
  • GetBig's A-Team is the Light of Truth!
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #2 on: December 12, 2012, 08:00:04 PM »
It's expensive, true.

But it's pretty top notch in the health care aspect.

There is a difference between the quality of health care and health insurance.

whork

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6587
  • Getbig!
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2012, 05:44:31 AM »
It's expensive, true.

But it's pretty top notch in the health care aspect.

There is a difference between the quality of health care and health insurance.

The overall health of americans is lower than its european counterparts.

But that may be because a lot of americans cant get health insurance?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #4 on: December 13, 2012, 06:25:06 AM »
The overall health of americans is lower than its european counterparts.

But that may be because a lot of americans cant get health insurance?

 ::)  ::)

Its called lifestyle choices, insurance doesnt change that. 

Ever go to a Denny's or Reb Lobster and look around? 


whork

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6587
  • Getbig!
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #5 on: December 13, 2012, 06:49:21 AM »
::)  ::)

Its called lifestyle choices, insurance doesnt change that. 

Ever go to a Denny's or Reb Lobster and look around? 



Are you saying americans are fat and unhealthy?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2012, 06:50:53 AM »
Are you saying americans are fat and unhealthy?

Yes, by virtue of lifetsyle and lack of activity and over eating, has nothing to do w insurance or lack thereof as a whole. 

Go to a walmart or any large gathering of people and look around. 

whork

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6587
  • Getbig!
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #7 on: December 13, 2012, 07:02:59 AM »
Yes, by virtue of lifetsyle and lack of activity and over eating, has nothing to do w insurance or lack thereof as a whole. 

Go to a walmart or any large gathering of people and look around. 

So Europeans are more healthy, slim and produktive than their obese american friends?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #8 on: December 13, 2012, 07:04:14 AM »
So Europeans are more healthy, slim and produktive than their obese american friends?

IDK - you know what i see here. 

Land Whales abound

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Purge_WTF

  • Guest
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #10 on: December 13, 2012, 07:26:47 AM »
 It'd be nice to go back to the good old days when there were no health insurance middlemen and the doctors made house calls.

whork

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6587
  • Getbig!
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #11 on: December 13, 2012, 08:08:43 AM »


He just called them land whales im not putting words in his mouth.

Wtf are you talkingabout?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #12 on: December 13, 2012, 09:12:40 AM »


Aetna CEO Sees Obama Health Law Doubling Some Premiums

 By Alex Nussbaum - 2012-12-13T05:01:00Z.

.


.

Health insurance premiums may as much as double for some small businesses and individual buyers in the U.S. when the Affordable Care Act’s major provisions start in 2014, Aetna Inc. (AET)’s chief executive officer said.

While subsidies in the law will shield some people, other consumers who make too much for assistance are in for “premium rate shock,” Mark Bertolini, who runs the third-biggest U.S. health-insurance company, told analysts yesterday at a conference in New York. The prospect has spurred discussion of having Congress delay or phase in parts of the law, he said.

“We’ve shared it all with the people in Washington and I think it’s a big concern,” the CEO said. “We’re going to see some markets go up as much as as 100 percent.”

Bertolini’s prediction is at odds with Congressional Budget Office estimates that the law will have little effect on small and large-employer plans and the Obama administration’s projections that middle-class families will actually save money. The 2010 law is expected to extend health care to about 30 million people who otherwise couldn’t get insurance, paid for by new taxes and fees on companies and wealthier individuals.

Those taxes will make coverage more expensive for insurers, as will other provisions such as a ban on discriminating against people with pre-existing medical conditions, Bertolini said. Premiums are likely to increase 25 percent to 50 percent on average in the small-group and individual markets, he said, citing projections by his Hartford, Connecticut-based company.

High Estimate

The one-time jump in rates also includes increases in costs that would come even without the law, Bertolini said.

“That just seems silly,” said Gary Claxton, a vice president at Kaiser Family Foundation, a Menlo Park, California- based nonprofit that studies health issues. “I can’t imagine anything going on in the small-group market that would change the average premium that much. On the individual market, there’s arguments for things changing, but those magnitudes seem high.”

The Obama administration said last year that “middle-class families” buying insurance through the law’s new online exchanges may save as much as $2,300 a year starting in 2014. Nick Papas, a White House spokesman, declined to comment on Bertolini’s predictions.

The CBO estimated in 2009 that the law will increase premiums 10 percent to 13 percent for individuals and have little effect on small and large-employer plans. After the subsidies are factored in, individual bills will go down by about 60 percent, the agency predicted.

About 43 percent of people who buy on the exchanges, or individual markets outside of them, won’t be eligible for subsidies, according to the report. They would see premium increases “somewhat less” than 10 percent to 13 percent, CBO predicted.

To contact the reporter on this story: Alex Nussbaum in New York at anussbaum1@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Reg Gale at rgale5@bloomberg.net

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #13 on: December 13, 2012, 09:16:47 AM »
Blue Shield of California seeks rate hikes up to 20%

 In filings with state regulators, Blue Shield is seeking an average rate increase of 12% for more than 300,000 customers. Consumer advocates say the firm should use its reserves to hold down rates.

By Chad Terhune, Los Angeles Times
December 13, 2012



Health insurer Blue Shield of California wants to raise rates as much as 20% for some individual policyholders, prompting calls for the nonprofit to use some of its record-high reserve of $3.9 billion to hold down premiums.
 
In filings with state regulators, Blue Shield is seeking an average rate increase of 12% for more than 300,000 customers, effective in March, with a maximum increase of 20%.
 
Some consumer advocates and healthcare economists say Blue Shield shouldn't be raising rates that high when it has stockpiled so much cash. The company's surplus is nearly three times as much as the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Assn. requires its member insurers to hold to cover future claims.






Anthem Blue Cross seeks to raise individual policyholders' rates
California hospitals review disaster plans in the wake of Sandy
Quiz: Test your healthcare knowledge



Ads by Google

MVP Health Care PlansHigh Quality Medicare Advantage Plans For Your Style. Know More! www.DiscoverMVP.com/Plans


"Blue Shield is sitting on a huge surplus that is beyond what is required or necessary," said Laurie Sobel, a senior attorney for Consumers Union in San Francisco. "It should be used to hold down rate increases when it hits these extraordinary levels."
 
California officials can take into account an insurer's amount of surplus, among many other factors, when determining whether they think a rate increase is reasonable. Both the California insurance commissioner and the state Department of Managed Health Care are reviewing the company's proposed premiums, but neither agency has the authority to reject changes in rates.
 
Some other states limit how much surplus can be held by nonprofit health plans. Other regulators press nonprofit insurers to return more money to consumers and the community overall since their stated mission is to serve the public good. Washington's insurance commissioner has said the two big nonprofit Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans there hold enough surplus to allow a portion of it to be used to reduce rates.
 
At Blue Shield of California, based in San Francisco, reserves have jumped 77% since 2006 from $2.2 billion to $3.9 billion in September. That has outpaced the company's 19% growth in annual revenue since 2006.
 
Blue Shield said its reserves have nothing to do with rate increases, and that money has been put aside for the future benefit of its policyholders.
 
"Reserves are needed to ensure our members' claims can be paid no matter what," said Blue Shield spokeswoman Lindy Wagner. "We need them to protect against uncertainties like a pandemic or another crisis."
 
The company also expects higher costs from an influx of new customers under the federal healthcare law in 2014.
 
"It's a once-in-a-lifetime change in the healthcare market that will bring a lot of volatility, and we need higher reserves for that," Wagner said.
 
Even with these proposed rate increases, Blue Shield said, it expects to lose money in the individual insurance market in 2013.
 
The insurer said its medical costs for this segment of the business grew 10.6% and what it actually pays is rising 12.5% after adjusting for its portion after customer deductibles. The state's largest for-profit health insurer, Anthem Blue Cross, cited a similar jump in medical costs in seeking rate hikes as high as 25% for some individual policyholders, effective in February.
 
California regulators expect to finish their reviews of various company rate filings in the coming weeks.
 
The Department of Managed Health Care requires the health plans it oversees to maintain a minimum amount of reserves to cover claims. For Blue Shield, that minimum threshold was $218 million as of Sept. 30.
 
Insurers strive to be comfortably above any government threshold to avoid any concerns and to maintain the confidence of credit-rating firms.
 
Carl McDonald, a managed-care analyst at Citigroup, said reserves at nonprofit Blues plans across the country reached record levels last year and remain robust thanks to lower medical claims and stock market gains. By one measure, he estimated that Blue Shield of California had a risk-based capital ratio of 1,092% in 2011.
 
For comparison, the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Assn. requires its member insurers to hold reserves of at least 375% of risk-based capital. Nationwide, state regulators generally intervene if reserves dip below 200%.
 
McDonald said nonprofit health plans tend to amass more cash because they can't issue stock like their for-profit rivals and they have limited access to the debt markets. "But it's quite debatable whether Blues need to hold more than twice as much capital as is required," McDonald said in a recent report.
 
Blue Shield said its reserve has grown at a slower pace since its pledge last year to limit profits to 2% of annual revenue and return millions of dollars to customers. The company announced that move after a consumer backlash to a bid to raise rates as much as 59% in 2011 that was later dropped.
 
Overall, the company said it has returned about $520 million to customers over the last three years because of the 2% limit on profits.
 
Kaiser Permanente, the state's largest nonprofit health plan, reported $16.3 billion in reserve on Sept. 30 in state filings. But Kaiser said that figure includes the value of buildings and equipment in its large network of hospitals and other medical facilities as well as reserves for that side of its business.
 
The Kaiser health plan is seeking to raise rates an average of 9% for 220,000 individual policyholders and dependents next month.
 
Larry Kirsch, a healthcare economist in Portland, Ore., who has studied surpluses at other Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans, said not enough regulators nationwide require nonprofit plans to justify their rationale for hoarding so much cash at a time when many consumers and small businesses are struggling to afford health benefits.
 
"There ought to be a reasoned analysis for when is enough," Kirsch said. "There always seems to be a 'sky is falling' story. I say prove it to me."
 
chad.terhune@latimes.com


Copyright © 2012, Los Angeles Times
.

War-Horse

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6490
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #14 on: December 13, 2012, 09:37:16 AM »
As usual 33333 spins.  Heres reality:  ALL COMPANIES THAT PROVIDE HEALTHCARE RIGHT NOW CAN KEEP THEIR EXISTING COVERAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!

                                                  ALL SMALL BUSINESS'S WILL RECIEVE A SUBSIDY FOR THE COST AND WILL CONTINUE TO COUNT COST OF PREMIUMS AS A TAX DEDUCTION.......WHICH LOWERS THE AMOUNT OF TAXES PAID.

REMEMBER ITS AN INDIVIDUAL MANDATE...SO EVEN IF THE BUSINESS "opts out" THE INDIVIDUAL CAN SHOP THE EXCHANGE AND GET A GOOD DEAL...AND RECIEVE MONEY BACK FOR HIS PREMIUMS.

THE NEW COMPANIES SET UP TO PROVIDE POLICIES WILL CONTINUE TO POUR MONEY INTO ECONOMY AND THAT IS PRO-GROWTH AND PRO BUSINESS


So dont let the scare tactics worry you.

War-Horse

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6490
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #15 on: December 13, 2012, 09:39:38 AM »
And yes big companies like blue sheild know that soon americans will have many more opportunties to buy elsewhere......so they are ramping up premium costs  before the window closes on them......its called gouging...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #16 on: December 13, 2012, 09:44:15 AM »
And yes big companies like blue sheild know that soon americans will have many more opportunties to buy elsewhere......so they are ramping up premium costs  before the window closes on them......its called gouging...

Typical of someone who never ran a business to believe that crap. 

whork

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6587
  • Getbig!
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #17 on: December 13, 2012, 09:46:25 AM »
And yes big companies like blue sheild know that soon americans will have many more opportunties to buy elsewhere......so they are ramping up premium costs  before the window closes on them......its called gouging...

Sounds like there is more competition in the future.

Thats a cornerstone in capitalism.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #18 on: December 13, 2012, 09:49:14 AM »
Sounds like there is more competition in the future.

Thats a cornerstone in capitalism.

 ::)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #19 on: December 13, 2012, 09:53:35 AM »
Democrats Find Out What's in ObamaCare and Don't Like It
 Townhall.com ^ | December 13, 2012 | Katie Pavlich


Posted on Thursday, December 13, 2012 11:13:08 AM by Kaslin

Senate Democrats who helped pass ObamaCare are finally seeing what is in it and aren't really so sure the massive tax increases mandated in the legislation will be good for their constituents, especially when it comes to the medical device tax which is set to further increase on January 1.


With some of their most influential constituent groups facing onerous tax increases that are slated to help fund the law’s mandates and regulations, Senators like Al Franken (D-MN), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Charles Schumer (D-NY), Patty Murray (D-WA), John Kerry (D-MA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and others -- all of whom voted in favor of the law -- are aiming to delay or outright repeal parts of ObamaCare.

 More from Tim Carney:


First, Democrats killed the ill-conceived long-term-care-insurance measure, known as the CLASS Act. This provision, which provided government insurance for long-term care, was, amazingly, booked as reducing the deficit. This was ridiculous, and after the bill passed, Democrats realized it was a disaster, and they repealed the provision.

 Another reason the bill was supposed to “reduce the deficit” was an unusually onerous tax hike on small businesses. The provision, known as the “1099 provision” would have forced small businesses to file all sorts of new paperwork for all sorts of transactions (sell a digital camera, file a 1099), in the hope of picking up transactions that are taxable. Congress also repealed that provision.

 And now the health-care-industry lobbies that supported this subsidy-and-mandate-laden bill are lobbying to kill the cost-controls that offset the costs of its subsidies. All sorts of providers are lobbying to kill the Independent Payment Advisory Board. And the medical-device industry has convinced two Democratic Obamacare-backing Senators to try to kill the medical device tax.

 A top Senate staffer explained (after ObamaCare passed), “This is a coverage bill, not a cost reduction bill.” David Bowen, who helped to craft the legislation, said that Senate Democrats had planned to follow in the path of Massachusetts’ RomneyCare plan by providing insurance coverage first, “knowing that that would bring on a cost battle second.”

 In fact, RomneyCare’s mandates and subsidies caused health care costs to dramatically increase in the Bay state, leading the current governor and state legislature to exert never-before-seen controls on insurers and health care providers as they also raised taxes.

 Not surprisingly, as Senate Democrats have gotten a look at what exactly is in ObamaCare, the parts of the law that were intended to control costs have gradually been stripped from the legislation.

 As I've written before, one of the most devasting taxes long-term is the medical device tax. Medical device development requires highly specialized education and an expensive degree in bio-medical engineering. Now that medical device companies are already cutting jobs because of ObamaCare costs, many students will no longer find it worth spending money on an expensive education only to have their investment not pay off. In the future, this will cause a shortage of medical device engineers which will further snowball into an overall decay of medical device innovation, leaving Americans and the world will have fewer life saving devices.


 A bipartisan outcry has been raised over the device tax, and for good reason. The tax was enacted to help fund the $1.76 trillion in new spending authorized under Obamacare, and it will actively undermine production of and improvement on medical devices which are crucial to patient outcomes.

 The device tax is a tax on gross receipts (sales, essentially) instead of a tax on profits, so the tax will be imposed even if a company sells its products at a loss. This one detail ensures that the 2.3% tax is deceptively large: the medical device industry’s tax burden is expected to double because of the Taxmageddon increase; some companies (such as Zoll, which manufactures defibrillators) will see their profit margins shaved by up to 40%.

 A recent study found that investment in medical research and development will fall by $2 billion per year because of the device tax—and that is a cautious estimate. R&D dollars drive innovation and innovation lowers costs, so the tax’s adverse effect on investment will keep expensive medical devices from becoming affordable and widely available in the future.

 More immediately, the device tax will gouge health consumers for essential products. Taxes on companies often end up hitting consumers as higher prices, and the device tax is no different. The actuary for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services made it plain that Obamacare’s “fees and the [device] tax would generally be passed through to health consumers in the form of higher drug and device prices and higher insurance premiums.” In other words, patients – many in dire need of care – may find crucial medical products out of their reach as a result of the 2.3% tax.

 Whatever costs cannot be passed along to patients will be absorbed by the medical device companies, which will lead businesses to cut jobs as they tread water to stay afloat. One study found that, depending on the elasticity of the tax, the medical device industry will be forced to fire between 14,500 and 47,100 workers—up to 10% of the workforce.

 Now, Democrats wanting to repeal the medical device tax is great but it doesn't change the fact that ObamaCare has to be paid for somehow if the legislation is going to stand as the law of the land.

War-Horse

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6490
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #20 on: December 13, 2012, 09:56:26 AM »
Typical of someone who never ran a business to believe that crap. 


Everything i said is true. And ive had a business for 20 yrs.  You on the other hand.....

War-Horse

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6490
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #21 on: December 13, 2012, 09:59:07 AM »
Sounds like there is more competition in the future.

Thats a cornerstone in capitalism.


You are correct again whork. Competition is supposed to be a GOP trademark. But as you can see they are confused and running around in the dark over their policies and what they stand for.  They took a beating in the election and are still f&cking with the american people.

whork

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6587
  • Getbig!
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #22 on: December 13, 2012, 09:59:55 AM »
::)

You dont like competition?

Or capitalism?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #23 on: December 13, 2012, 10:01:51 AM »
You dont like competition?

Or capitalism?

Do you even what WTF obamacare does and is?

War-Horse

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6490
Re: Expensive and crap= US healthcare
« Reply #24 on: December 13, 2012, 10:06:26 AM »
Do you even what WTF obamacare does and is?

Apparently you dont.   Here read and weep 3333333.  God forbid you learn some facts instead of fox comedy central propaganda.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/healthreform