Why I Support Universal Healthcare Coverage

[alatide]

I would think that the left would just leave Universal Health Care alone anyway as shortened lives just lead to being closer to zero-population-growth. It doesn't make any sense, does it?

When we want to control the population of a deer herd, we allow the taking of does, we don't go out and spay them. (A cruel analogy yes, but relevant as most leftists see us as animals anyway).

Who is "the left?"

 

[alatide]

If you were really concerned about making healthcare more affordable, you'd be lobbying Congress to pass tort reform, to abolish "in state" laws for insurance companies, to make medical proceedures tax deuctible, to give doctors the freedom to collectively negotiate with insurance companies and drive down the cost of medical care, to make every American eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA), and removing the requirement that individuals must obtain a high-deductible insurance policy before opening an HSA, etc.

Until you do that, you don't care about making healthcare affordable to the poor. You just want a liberal government power grab.

I agree with tort reform and abolishing "in-state" insurance laws. I think, however, that the insurance companies don't need any help reducing payments to doctors. They've done a good job of that on their own. Of course we don't see any savings. It goes to their profit. Tax deductions don't help people who can't afford insurance today and certainly not those who are unemployed (about 10% nationally and going up). Health savings accounts are good but I've found they basically pay for mu co-pays and deductible.

Basically, none of these things help those who are really poor. They do help the middle class and above.

 

[OldRegular]

No "finally" to it. I have always been clear on this. Do you really believe health care is not rationed by the HMOs and insurance companies now? The death panel are what we need to get rid of. They work in the "for profit" insurers offices right now.

No you have not been clear that you wanted Socialized Health Care!

I did not have my health care rationed when I had private insurance. I have not had it rationed since being on Medicare. But there will be a DEATH PANEL and I will certainly have health care denied if Obama the Marxist gets his Obamascare passed and cuts Medicare by $50,000,000,000 per year.

 

[Twizzler]

Who is "the left?"

Are you kidding me?

 

[Benjamin]

When I was young I drove without insurance and during that time in AZ they passed a law that everyone must have liability insurance. The leading argument for passing the law was that if everyone had liability it would bring down the cost of insurance for all. At that time I checked into getting it but could still not afford it as I struggled as a high school dropout just to keep a roof over my head and food in my mouth. About a year and a half later I was ticketed for not having it and needed to get it before going to court. The cost of getting the liability insurance had literally tripled within that short time and not only that but I was personally penalized, by the insurance company for not previously owning insurance, so what happened to the cost going down?

I’ll tell you what I think is that “whoever” is offering the coverage and has their hands in your pocket, especially when it is mandated by law, “they” as a middleman will find wasteful uses for your money and make everything relating to your coverage cost more. Seems to me if the health care reform is passed we will be gaining a middleman to work with the other middleman when what we really need is insurance company reform to work against the middleman.

 

[Salty]

Who is "the left?"

left = liberal = to give freely * The problem is the left wants to freely give away government $$$ (thats my tax money that I have worked for) and give it to those who don't have it.

A local talk show host here in the Salt City has said on the air that it is the responsibility of the government to financially help those who need help, even if they refuse to work.
He also believes that a person should have as many kids as she wants (on welfare) and of course we should pay for it.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Simplified Answer: "I support Universal Health Care becasue Obama says that we need it."

Speak for yourself. My support long predates Obama's arrival on the scene.

 

[blackbird]

When I was young I drove without insurance and during that time in AZ they passed a law that everyone must have liability insurance. The leading argument for passing the law was that if everyone had liability it would bring down the cost of insurance for all. At that time I checked into getting it but could still not afford it as I struggled as a high school dropout just to keep a roof over my head and food in my mouth. About a year and a half later I was ticketed for not having it and needed to get it before going to court. The cost of getting the liability insurance had literally tripled within that short time and not only that but I was personally penalized, by the insurance company for not previously owning insurance, so what happened to the cost going down?

I’ll tell you what I think is that “whoever” is offering the coverage and has their hands in your pocket, especially when it is mandated by law, “they” as a middleman will find wasteful uses for your money and make everything relating to your coverage cost more. Seems to me if the health care reform is passed we will be gaining a middleman to work with the other middleman when what we really need is insurance company reform to work against the middleman.

Not changing the subject but

something similiar happened to me that I caught on to long ago

back when I was young---a very convincing auto insurance man insured me with his company----I was "fully covered"

Then I caught on and called

"I want you to drop collision coverage!!"

"You do??? You can't do that!!"

"Yes I do and Yes I can and do it!! And while you're at it---drop the toeing package and the comprehensive!!"

Liability is all I need--------but you ought to see the insurance guys squeel and moan and slobber and stuff when I tell them------Liability is all I need!!

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Not changing the subject but

something similiar happened to me that I caught on to long ago

back when I was young---a very convincing auto insurance man insured me with his company----I was "fully covered"

Then I caught on and called

"I want you to drop collision coverage!!"

"You do??? You can't do that!!"

"Yes I do and Yes I can and do it!! And while you're at it---drop the toeing package and the comprehensive!!"

Liability is all I need--------but you ought to see the insurance guys squeel and moan and slobber and stuff when I tell them------Liability is all I need!!

Insurance companies are greedy. This is the problem.

Although, if your car is financed, then the lender CAN & usually does require complete coverage.

 

[Robert Snow]

When I was young I drove without insurance and during that time in AZ they passed a law that everyone must have liability insurance. The leading argument for passing the law was that if everyone had liability it would bring down the cost of insurance for all. At that time I checked into getting it but could still not afford it as I struggled as a high school dropout just to keep a roof over my head and food in my mouth. About a year and a half later I was ticketed for not having it and needed to get it before going to court. The cost of getting the liability insurance had literally tripled within that short time and not only that but I was personally penalized, by the insurance company for not previously owning insurance, so what happened to the cost going down?

I’ll tell you what I think is that “whoever” is offering the coverage and has their hands in your pocket, especially when it is mandated by law, “they” as a middleman will find wasteful uses for your money and make everything relating to your coverage cost more. Seems to me if the health care reform is passed we will be gaining a middleman to work with the other middleman when what we really need is insurance company reform to work against the middleman.

Then you should understand that the main problem is that insurance companies profit on our illnesses. We need laws to protect us from the insurance companies. That is why I support single-payer health care for all!

 

[Revmitchell]

Then you should understand that the main problem is that insurance companies profit on our illnesses. We need laws to protect us from the insurance companies. That is why I support single-payer health care for all!

So do trial lawyers, doctors, nurses,all medical staff, and hospitals. Why single out the insurance companies.

 

[targus]

Then you should understand that the main problem is that insurance companies profit on our illnesses. We need laws to protect us from the insurance companies. That is why I support single-payer health care for all!

And if the single payer system doesn't deliver? What are your options?

Hint - there will be no other options. You will just be out of luck.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

And why give trial lawyers a pass ? Talk about greed, they stand to benefit most out of the zero's plan.

 

[Winman]

Then you should understand that the main problem is that insurance companies profit on our illnesses. We need laws to protect us from the insurance companies. That is why I support single-payer health care for all!

That is simply not true. Insurance companies are way down on the list of profit margin.

Overall, the profit margin for health insurance companies was a modest 3.4 percent over the past year, according to data provided by Morningstar. That ranks 87th out of 215 industries and slightly above the median of 2.2 percent. By this measure, the most profitable industry over the past year has been beverages, with a 25.9 percent profit margin. Right behind that were healthcare real-estate trusts (firms that are basically the landlords for hospitals and healthcare facilities) and application-software (think Windows). The worst performer was copper, with a profit margin of minus 56.6 percent.

The reason insurance rates are high and continue to rise is because of lawsuits. Some doctor's must pay as much as $200,000 per year or more for insurance, because if they make a mistake they could be sued for many millions of dollars. Insurance companies have no choice but to raise their rates to cover this risk.

And not all insurance companies are for profit. Mutual insurance companies do not operate on profit and pay dividends to their owners the customers.

I guess I get a little defensive, being a former insurance agent, but most people do not understand insurance whatsoever, and most do not know that they operate on a very small profit margin. About 96% of all monies insurance companies take in goes to pay for claims and the overhead of running the business.

Trial lawyers on the other hand often keep 40-50% of the awards given in suits. If I am injured at work due to negligence and cannot work again, I should be awarded enough to live. But why should a lawyer get half my money?

Did you know that in the original 1,200 page bill written by the Democrats there was not one word mentioned of tort reform or malpractice? Did you know that the trial lawyers have been the single largest donors to the Democratic Party for years?

It is the Democrats pulling the wool over your eyes. They know who the real villians are in healthcare, the lawyers. But no way are they going to bite the hand that feeds them.

Edit- here is the source of the quote I showed.

http://www.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2009/08/25/why-health-insurers-make-lousy-villains.html

 

[Benjamin]

Then you should understand that the main problem is that insurance companies profit on our illnesses. We need laws to protect us from the insurance companies. That is why I support single-payer health care for all!

Insurance companies just may be the problem, but replacing them with a government insurance plan? Although I agree something needs to be done, I just don’t see that as the answer and expect that just like the argument that I mentioned, which promised lower rates for all when all are insured, they are more likely to triple the cost to all. Who is going to pay for the mess of the government insurance plan, if passed? We all are, without a choice, and this while watching the quality of our heath care decline while they attempt to make the “budget” fit. By the track record I just don't see the government accomplishing this without a ton of wasteful spending causing a reverse effect.

 

[OldRegular]

Then you should understand that the main problem is that insurance companies profit on our illnesses. We need laws to protect us from the insurance companies. That is why I support single-payer health care for all!

Real smart Snow. If an insurance company gives you the shaft you have recourse to the court system. If the Federal government gives you the shaft: grin and bear it.

 

[Benjamin]

Trial lawyers on the other hand often keep 40-50% of the awards given in suits. If I am injured at work due to negligence and cannot work again, I should be awarded enough to live. But why should a lawyer get half my money?

Did you know that in the original 1,200 page bill written by the Democrats there was not one word mentioned of tort reform or malpractice? Did you know that the trial lawyers have been the single largest donors to the Democratic Party for years?

The law suit issues are another thing that should be reformed and tie in closely with the insurance companies so I agree with that, but not about the profit margin as there are a lot of insurance salesman (middlemen) making a lot of money for wages that are being tacked on to cost of health care. You get government jobs involved and that is going to be a big part of the wasteful spending.

 

[alatide]

left = liberal = to give freely * The problem is the left wants to freely give away government $$$ (thats my tax money that I have worked for) and give it to those who don't have it.

A local talk show host here in the Salt City has said on the air that it is the responsibility of the government to financially help those who need help, even if they refuse to work.
He also believes that a person should have as many kids as she wants (on welfare) and of course we should pay for it.

The problem is you don't differentiate between individuals. Everyone who doesn't think like you is "the left." I don't agree with either one of those two statements either.

 

[Winman]

Did anybody actually read the article I posted? Health Insurance companies on a whole make about 3.4% profit. I wouldn't call that gouging the public whatsoever. Yes, they take in billions in premiums, but they pay out billions as well.

How much do you pay in health insurance per year? Let's say you pay $100 a week at your job. That's $5,200 a year. In 10 years it is $52,000. Seems like a lot, but one week in the hospital can cost you much more than that.

On the other hand, the pharmaceutical companies make an average of 16.4% profit, nearly five times the profit that insurance companies make.

Health insurers turn out to be underperformers compared with the other parts of the healthcare sector. Pharmaceutical companies have a profit margin of 16.4 percent—seventh highest of the 215 industries that Morningstar tracks. Others segments of healthcare with margins well above the median include healthcare information (9.4 percent), home healthcare firms (8.5 percent), medical labs (8.2 percent), and generic drugmakers (6.5 percent).

The big money, in other words, isn't in the insurance industry. If it's anywhere, it's in the pharmaceutical industry. But the Obamanauts appear to have reached a kind of détente with Big Pharma in exchange for that industry's tepid support for some kind of reform. So Obama and his foot soldiers need to look elsewhere for black hats.

Everybody loves to beat up insurance companies, well until they get seriously ill or have an accident, then they suddenly love their insurance company.

Other segments of the healthcare industry are far more to blame for the high costs than insurance companies. And trial lawyers who advertise on TV everyday looking to sue the health industry are the biggest villians of all. But the Democrats will not go after them because they have been the single biggest contributor to their party for decades.

 

[targus]

On the other hand, the pharmaceutical companies make an average of 16.4% profit, nearly five times the profit that insurance companies make.

At the same time because they are profitable they put substanial money back into research searching for the next new drug so that they can continue to be profitable.

Once the government takes over say good bye to that kind of research - unless the government funds it. In which case future profits from successful research won't be the driving factor. It will be pointless studies designed just to get the grant money from the government. In other words waste.