Naitonalized Healthcare...

Ya know what amazes me about your rants???

You write paragraph after paragraph yet SAY NOTHING!!!

But the BEST part??? The absolute BEST part of this entire rant of yours is your BEGGING to be shown this Senate document!!!

You read the McCarran-Ferguson Act and “CAN’T FIND IT!!!”

It’s so obvious it’s SCARY…Yet you CAN’T FIND IT??? To quote you… “I READ SUMMARIES ON MULITPLE SITES”

While your looking…Show me the LAW that lets CREDIT CARD companies send out a bill 4 days before it’s due to be paid. And when the customer misses the due date they get hit with a LATE FEE…

SHOW ME THE LAW THAT ALLOWS THIS!!! SHOW ME THE EXACT WORDING THAT SAYS IT’S LEGAL TO BILL SOMEONE USING a date cycle that is virtually impossible to meet. SHOW US THE EXACT WORDING.

GOOD LUCK FINDING IT…That law works EXACTLY the same as McCarran-Ferguson…

It’s ALLOWED under the INTERPRETATION of the statute!!!

I have a Senate Document that concludes almost WORD FOR WORD exactly what Hooches Dad related in his story. It’s explains exactly WHAT INSURANCES COMPANIES ARE ACTUALLY DOING with McCarran-Ferguson.

Do you REALLY think your going to find a LAW that READS…

IT IS NOW LEGAL FOR ALL INSURANCE COMPANIES TO VIOLATE ANTI-TRUST LAWS???

Are you that NAIVE???

MY GOD…You really have no clue what your looking for here do you???

But I must admit…It’s been EXTREMELY ENTERTAINING reading your posts as you drive yourself crazy looking for “THE EXACT WORDING” :rolleyes :rolleyes :rolleyes Hey… next time you buy an investment property make sure you look for the EXACT LOCATION OF ANY TERMITES!!!

You know what’s GREAT about this…It’s like throwing a TOY to a annoying child…He runs away for a while, leaves you alone, then when he comes back…You just throw him another toy and he’s gone AGAIN… And… He isn’t even AWARE what’s happening!!!

FDjake…

Do you REALLY think that EVERYONE can not see through this… :rolleyes :bs

I take it then by yet ANOTHER non-answer and CLEAR CUT opportunity to provide the TRUTH, that you DO admit you lied AND fabricated “EXTENSIVE” and tried to apply it to my posts?.. Since you chose NOT to answer it is no longer an assertion, but a FACT that you lied and fabricated “Extensive” and tried to apply it to my posts…

You have to live with it… EVERYONE already KNOWS the truth… I really thought with the direct challenge yoou were going to “man up” and admit what EVERYONE already knows…

At least we can finally move on…

With regards to Mccarran-Ferguson, if you can show us in the ACT ITSELF, and not partisan opinion, where it provides an exemption for “price fixing and collusion” to the insurance industry, you will have made your case. There is plenty of partisan material arguing both sides, so it’s hard to know who is correct on this… But most of the opinion on this seem to be regarding Property and Casualty insurance in the wake of Katrina which seems to be the big push in 2006 on repealing Mccarran-Ferguson…

As I said when I posted asking Hooch for the law he was referecing, and this started, I am against price fixing and collusion, but I haven’t seen any legal summary, in the act itself, or any other example that this is the case.

The fact that health insurance is different from state to state, and different rates for indivduals vs. groups vs. government and business rates woulld seem to argue against it. If they were all the same pricing, there would be no need to shop health insurance… Add to that, that Life, Disability, Auto insurance has turned into an extremely competitive pricing issue… We just need to figure out how to do the same with health insurance and put OURSELVES, NOT the government OR the insurance company, back in control…

So let’s get back to the issue at hand… poke holes in this and let’s refine it…

[i][b]"All the government would be responsible for in the scenario I presented, is collecting the money into a sequestered account, providing vouchers that insurance companies can redeem for that account, have the health industry COMPETE for the dollars in lower cost and/or better coverage, and if the tax payer is able to get a better rate than their voucher provides for, they get it back in a refund…

By doing this, it puts the control BACK in the hands of the people and NOT the government OR the healthcare industry… and/or greatly minimizes it."[/b][/i]

SOOOOOOO…

Your admitting you were NAIVE by expecting to find the “EXACT WORDS” which allowed Insurance companies to violate anti trust laws in a statue drafted by politicians???

If we STAY ON POINT here…We go back to HOOCHES POST…

It CLEARLY shows EXACTLY how Insurance companies have been manipulating PRICING to increase their PROFITS at the cost of SUBSCRIBERS…and it CAME from an EXECUTIVE at an INSURANCE COMPANY…MY GOD…Talk about the smoking gun…Couple that with my previous posts concerning Dollar Bill McGuires OBSCENE pay package and a CLEAR pattern emerges.

This then CLEARLY shows how REMOVING the PROFIT MOTIVE in Health Insurance and replacing it with a NON PROFIT GOVERMENT RUN system (like STATE COLLEGES) could save people money.

Basically…AS I stated earlier…Hooches post…BLEW A LOT OF HOLES IN YOUR THEORY!!!

That IS the outcome here…You may not LIKE IT…YOU may not ADMIT it…But ANYONE ELSE READING this GETS IT!!!

Positive, It looks like fdjake was right regarding the actual law allowing it.

I can assure you that my dad would never have lied to me and I would ask him but he passed away 3 years ago.

I did a little research and found a few things you may want to look at. It appears that with the governments help, they use a combination of the Mccarran-Ferguson Act and the Sherman Act to get away with price fixing.

Here notice the undefined “procedural hurdles” the court ran into when the Travelers and other insurance giants got sued.
http://blog.nola.com/tpmoney/2008/12/pricefixing_suit_against_insur.html

Too bad the direct link on this page was dead.
http://www.petitiononline.com/Lutz0001/petition.html

Look for the separate exemption provided for the Sherman Act
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/McCarran-Ferguson+Act+of+1945

Scroll down to the McCarran-Ferguson Act on this govt page.
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/divisionmanual/chapter2.htm

Take a look at the Clayton Act too. This also deals with antitrust and even allows labor organizations (unions) to not have to be restricted by the antitrust laws.

Insurance companies also don’t have to abide by the Robinson-Patman Anti-Discrimination act or the Federal Trade Commission Act.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001013----000-.html

It’s funny how when the government wants to screw over the average Joe they do it in a deep web of intertwined laws that would take hours if not days to completely decipher. That way they get the kickbacks they want from the profiteer, and the public never knows they have been royally screwed.

Well, the cat’s out of the bag and the truth is now ready to be spread. I already contacted my deadbeat congressmen in the house and senate. If I end up having a heart attack or accidentally driving off a cliff within the next couple of months you guys know what actually happened. We are presently among the few “outsiders” in the United States that are aware of this.

HOOCH…

I just wanted to thank you for your post…Not because it made my argument or didn’t make it…

Just because it OPENED the eyes of some people.

GREAT POST…GREAT STORY…

Keep 'em coming!!!

Thanks fdjake,

I have some interesting insights on the real reason behind the entire economic meltdown that I plan to write about once I get some time.

Learning the truth about the present economic crisis is imperative for investors as financial decisions and investments can be positioned in a way that you will win. Predicting the future requires analysis of the past as history repeats itself. There are a thousand different reasons people give for the crisis but only one that has created it.

"SOOOOOOO…

“Your admitting you were NAIVE by expecting to find the “EXACT WORDS” which allowed Insurance companies to violate anti trust laws in a statue drafted by politicians???”

NOOOOOOOO… that is NOT what I am saying… I am saying that YOU said the word said “EXACTLY”… YOU, not me, and I’ve challenged you everytime to PROVE IT… and you just won’t do it wasting everyone’s time…

Let’s just get it out… what is the document you are referencing so it be scrutinized and we can put it to rest… but if it is Senate “testimony”, don’t bother… like I said, that is partisan and one-sided. There is Senate testimony on BOTH sides of this issue, so that is useless and shows us nothing… being that the repeal didn’t happen, IN A DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY CONGRESS, the arguments didn’t complete the job… It is my understanding they are trying again this year…

Show us in the ACT ITSELF or legal summary regarding Mccarran-Ferguson where it says “EXACTLY” what Hooch said that insurance companies were exempt from “price fixing and collusion”

Otherwise, quit wasting everone’s time… This is the last time I will address this, FDjake… it is continuing to distract from the subject of the thread… Or is that you intent?

Hooch, thanks for the posts, I will look into them…

“I can assure you that my dad would never have lied to me and I would ask him but he passed away 3 years ago.” -

I never doubted your Dad told you that, and that’s why I asked for the law in the first place. I already agreed with you that I did not believe in “price fixing and collusion”, but when I looked at summaries of the law, etc. it did not state they were exempt from “price fixing collusion”, and in the law itself it sets up a three tier system in place, that are still subject to State Law, and and Federal law that was put in place directly regarding insurance companies to displace the State law… so you can see where this can get a bit murky…

“It appears that with the governments help, they use a combination of the Mccarran-Ferguson Act and the Sherman Act to get away with price fixing.”

It doesn’t surprise me in the least that the government had it’s hand in this (i.e. - price fixing and collusion), as it is what THEY want to do in the form of a never ending open-ended tax… ANOTHER reason they should not be TRUSTED with nationalized healthcare…

“There are a thousand different reasons people give for the crisis but only one that has created it.” - THIS sound interesting… can’t wait to hear your take on it… but do me a favor, start another thread on it, this one is hard enough to keep on track…

Hooch… from your perspective, do you have any holes you can poke in this concept?..
[i][b]

"All the government would be responsible for in the scenario I presented, is collecting the money into a sequestered account, providing vouchers that insurance companies can redeem for that account, have the health industry COMPETE for the dollars in lower cost and/or better coverage, and if the tax payer is able to get a better rate than their voucher provides for, they get it back in a refund…

By doing this, it puts the control BACK in the hands of the people and NOT the government OR the healthcare industry… and/or greatly minimizes it."[/b][/i]

No wonder why most of the insurance giants corporate headquarters are in Connecticut.

“”“Sec. 35-44b. Judicial construction of Connecticut Antitrust Act. It is the intent of the General Assembly that in construing sections 35-24 to 35-46, inclusive, the courts of this state shall be guided by interpretations given by the federal courts to federal antitrust statutes.”“”

“All the government would be responsible for in the scenario I presented, is collecting the money into a sequestered account”

What stops the dirty bastards from spending it or “investing” it like they did with social security? The courts and politicians work hand and hand. To be honest with you, I’m not sure I really like the federal government holding my money for me.

“providing vouchers that insurance companies can redeem for that account,”

I’m not sure I understand this part. Exactly what is the reason for insurance companies in your plan? I don’t get the voucher stuff. Please explain. If the government already has your money, why the insurance? Why not straight to the health care industry competing for pools of local people which would comprise of sick and healthy?

In my opinion, all we need to do is add competition to the mix. Force the AMA to allow 10x the amount of doctors to graduate or threaten the end of their existence, stop all monopolies (fdjake has some great info he found on this), allow nurses with software programs to do all general healthcare as studies have shown a particular software diagnosis program and nurse combo to be more effective at diagnosis than a doctor. I don’t recall the name of the software.

Allow people to medicate themselves to a much greater degree. Tell me why I have to go to the doctor to get some Valtrex for a cold sore when I know what a cold sore is better than a doctor would? Tell me why I have to go to the doctor to get my blood pressure checked and a bill in order to get refills on my high bp medicine? I am fully capable of taking care of myself and need no help from a doctor in doing so unless I for some reason can’t figure something out by searching symptoms on WebMD. I am forced to pay the doctor for my entire life for ailments that I already am fully aware of. It’s not like blood pressure medicine or cold sore medicine is addictive. It’s just a way to fill the docs pockets with cash and no one seems to question it.

Actually, do you know what will really fix the health care problem in America? Term limits will do it. Every single one of the dirty bastards in congress are on the take by the health care and insurance industries. You know who they really have in mind. It’s who actually paid to get them elected. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you.

Yes, I said it… All of the dirty bastards are committing treason which is punishable by death.

Here is a letter from Senator Mark Warner to me. See if you see where they are planning to screw us over. Notice what is in store for us with a semi translucent veil of being something for the people when in reality it just pays for future elections.

Dear Mr. _______, (ommitted due to topic and extremely limited trust of the government)

Thank you for your recent letter about reforming our nation’s health care system. I share your concerns about the need to reform our health care system in a deliberate, informed and responsible manner.

Although I do not support a government-run single-payer health care system, I believe we need comprehensive reform to achieve a competitive, cost-effective, and efficient system. This effort should be primarily focused on ensuring that all Americans can get adequate health coverage that is cost-effective and “”“based upon data-driven medical standards”“”. (Keyword for, we are going to keep your medical records online for any doctor or insurance carrier to see. Some say, that is great, they will provide better care for me by understanding my medical history. The smart say, that is wacked, they are helping the insurance company get a comprehensive list of medical ailments I have had in the past so they can screw me on premiums) Any final reform should also include measures to promote use of electronic medical records and a more intense focus on wellness and preventive care. (Seeing the doctor frequently will really help us all out, won’t it? Doc, I’ve got the sniffles, do ya think it’s the pig flu? There is a nice waste of tax payer money to fatten the docs pockets)

Using the budget reconciliation process to address health care reform has benefits and drawbacks. Proponents of reconciliation, which would require only 51votes in the Senate as opposed to 60, argue that it will enable fast action in an area that desperately needs reform and allow for coverage of the uninsured to be improved and health care costs reduced. (So, he gave up the Dems plan. They will use budget reconciliation to force this to happen and there will be no debate from the Republican side.) Critics maintain that the process would push forward an agenda without bringing all sides to the table, poisoning attempts to achieve a bipartisan solution to the health care reform debate. As I formulate my position on this issue, I will keep your comments in mind. (How nice, my comments will help formulate his bipartisan decision since there won’t be one)

Thanks again for writing with your views on health care. I hope to have your input in the coming months as we craft legislation to improve a health care system that is in dire need of reform. (Believe me, he will have my input. So will Senator Webb (D) of VA and Bob Goodlatte (R) of the House)

Sincerely,
MARK R. WARNER
United States Senator

The only thing that Mark Warner failed to mention which is part of both the Republican and Democrat plan is the fact that they want to end medical lawsuits. It already costs a bare minimum of 25K to sue a doctor. The lawyer will do it for free if the think they can win as they get paid upon a successful suit but you have depositions which are a minimum of 15K, bringing in an expert witness which would be a doctor from out of state which has a proven track record that is significantly more experienced than the doc that did the job. That is 1K per hour from door to door to go to court. etc, etc, etc.

I bought my X wife a set of tits and the doctor butchered her. I didn’t have the extra 25k sitting around to “possibly” win the case. The lawyers all loved the case and wanted to take it but couldn’t guarantee a win.
For reference on this issue view this page. This is basically the deposition I wrote for her to submit to the judge and docs insurance company.
http://normanharris.blogspot.com/

Sorry, my point on that last part was, with a cost of 25K plus to sue a doctor for medical malpractice, I can pretty much assure you that there are very few med mal law suits that the people don’t honestly feel that the doctor butchered or wrongfully killed their love one.

Suing a doctor is only for the extremely wealthy.

“What stops the dirty bastards from spending it or “investing” it like they did with social security?”

That would be the point of the sequestered account, written into law, unlike Social Security (which has run at a surplus every year since it’s inception, but is always in trouble because it is not sequestered). We can learn from that mistake…

“I’m not sure I really like the federal government holding my money for me.” -

Yeah, I’m with you on that, but there are those who are apparently, and it was the only way I could see involving the government in that aspect… but it’s a good point and one of the ways we can address that is to make it an opt-in for the government to collect the money for those who don’t have the discipline to do it themselves… some people miss it less as a tax, and give the government an interest free loan every year with their money… either way, it makes the heath insurance company have to market directly to the consumer for access to the money.

“I’m not sure I understand this part. Exactly what is the reason for insurance companies in your plan? I don’t get the voucher stuff. Please explain. If the government already has your money, why the insurance? Why not straight to the health care industry competing for pools of local people which would comprise of sick and healthy?”

If the money went directly to the insurance company, that would make the government a clearing house of sorts, and open to the corruption we already have and the idea is to get the health care industry competing for the money. The voucher would representy money the government collected from individuals/companies that could be used for healtcare only… The healthcare insurance company would then have to compete for those dollars… If the consumer is able to get a program for less than total amount of the voucher, they get rebated the difference, or they can apply it towards deductibles, etc. point is, the CONSUMER has the choice and options, NOT the government or insurance industry. If we allowed all health insurance companies to operate nationally, it would also get the states competing for their homes offices, and drive costs down that way… It was also encourage NEW insurance companies and business models, like what happened with auto, life, disability, etc… It also opens up alternative medicine avenues… but the point is the CHOICE is left up to the consumer…

"Force the AMA to allow 10x the amount of doctors to graduate or threaten the end of their existence, stop all monopolies (fdjake has some great info he found on this), allow nurses with software programs to do all general healthcare as studies have shown a particular software diagnosis program and nurse combo to be more effective at diagnosis than a doctor. I don’t recall the name of the software. "
Well, you are not going to get an argument from my wife, a nurse, on that… :biggrin

There are already nurse practitioners out there (we have one in our own town a 1/2 mile up the road), and would defintely be a cog in the wheel… One of the hurdles to nationalized healthcare IS the shortage of doctors… Part of the problem is that it is HUGE committment in terms of school-time and finances to become a doctor. It take ALOT of dedication, and like lawyers, they want to be paid… if we pushed the concept of nurse practictioner, that would add another tier of opportunity for growth for nurses also…

“Allow people to medicate themselves to a much greater degree.”

Over the counter meds, people already do to a large degree… when it involves meds that can be used for other purposes (i.e. - narcotics, etc.), I don’t have a problem with that being issued by a doctor.

“Tell me why I have to go to the doctor to get some Valtrex for a cold sore when I know what a cold sore is better than a doctor would?”

I don’t know how you would know what a cold sore is better than a doctor, but aren’t there over the counter meds for that now, like Herpecin?

“Tell me why I have to go to the doctor to get my blood pressure checked and a bill in order to get refills on my high bp medicine?”

From what I understand, they need to monitor it to adjust med levels. Some people are not good at taking their meds, and this causes variations that can be accounted for by a doctor with blood tests, etc… Average person does not know how to do this…

“It’s just a way to fill the docs pockets with cash and no one seems to question it.”

I question what’s charged all the time, but along with presriptions comes legal liability, unfortunately…

There must be more holes… get creative… :smile

[i][b]"All the government would be responsible for in the scenario I presented, is collecting the money into a sequestered account, providing vouchers that insurance companies can redeem for that account, have the health industry COMPETE for the dollars in lower cost and/or better coverage, and if the tax payer is able to get a better rate than their voucher provides for, they get it back in a refund…

By doing this, it puts the control BACK in the hands of the people and NOT the government OR the healthcare industry… and/or greatly minimizes it."[/b][/i]

“”“If the money went directly to the insurance company, that would make the government a clearing house of sorts, and open to the corruption we already have and the idea is to get the health care industry competing for the money.”“”

I still don’t see any need for a middleman (insurance company) when the government is essentially the insurance company as they have collected your money. I would rather drop that cost out of the picture and have the health care industry compete directly for these vouchers from the government if the government was in the picture.

“”" One of the hurdles to nationalized healthcare IS the shortage of doctors… Part of the problem is that it is HUGE committment in terms of school-time and finances to become a doctor. It take ALOT of dedication, and like lawyers, they want to be paid… “”"

I don’t see it as being necessary for medical school to be so costly or lengthy. More med schools and forcing the AMA to stop controlling the supply and demand of doctors will end that quickly. High costs of medical school are directly related to how many the AMA allows to be accredited.

“”“if we pushed the concept of nurse practictioner, that would add another tier of opportunity for growth for nurses also… “””

I agree, to the point where I think that doctors should be completely phased out of this type of work which a nurse is perfectly capable of doing.

“Allow people to medicate themselves to a much greater degree.”
Over the counter meds, people already do to a large degree… when it involves meds that can be used for other purposes (i.e. - narcotics, etc.), I don’t have a problem with that being issued by a doctor.

Think about how many meds are under the counter. A massive amount of which are not addictive in any way.

I don’t know how you would know what a cold sore is better than a doctor, but aren’t there over the counter meds for that now, like Herpecin?

The over the counter stuff doesn’t work well and those who get cold sores can identify them (a certain tingling feel) prior to even seeing a visual sign. Therefore, I am more capable of identifying a cold sore than a doctor.

“Tell me why I have to go to the doctor to get my blood pressure checked and a bill in order to get refills on my high bp medicine?”
From what I understand, they need to monitor it to adjust med levels. Some people are not good at taking their meds, and this causes variations that can be accounted for by a doctor with blood tests, etc… Average person does not know how to do this…

The docs don’t do blood tests to see if you are taking your blood pressure medicine. They check your blood pressure. The exact same thing that you can do in the pharmacy for FREE. And the pharmacist could see the test and say It looks like you need a slightly higher dose or need to switch to a different kind. Remember, they are doctors and are fully capable of prescribing medication. I believe that they are not part of the AMA and the AMA has it locked up that only the medical doctors can prescribe meds. I have found pharmacists to be much more educated about the pharmaceuticals that the family docs are.

The same thing goes for other meds. Many independent pharmacies are now starting to do things like cholesterol testing, etc. They could easily guide the consumer to the meds that would best suit them with absolutely no doctor involvement.

Hooch…

“I still don’t see any need for a middleman (insurance company) when the government is essentially the insurance company as they have collected your money. I would rather drop that cost out of the picture and have the health care industry compete directly for these vouchers from the government if the government was in the picture.”

There is more to an insurance company than just collecting the money. Add to that, it costs more for federal employees than it does for private-sector employees for the same type of work, and it is harder to fire ineffective federal employees than it is private-sector employees.

The main problem I would see with making the government THE insurance company, is that would eliminate a major factor in the competitive part of the equation… the actual competition… add to that, that if the government is THE insurance company, it is defacto THE one source that controls pricing, programs, and access to care which eliminates opportunity. Any substandard care or service… too bad… it would be MUCH harder to change anything with the two parties vying for power every two to four years…

Incentive to make a good living is also a major factor for those entering the medical profession and why they go onto advanced degrees. When you remove the profit motive (i.e. - individuals and companies), complacency sets in, innovations are dampened and the best results are not achieved…

Another factor that needs to be considered is that if you currently are not satisfied with your insurance companies, plans, services, etc. you can CHOOSE to change companies… if those SAME unsatisfactory conditions existed with the government, too bad… they are the ONLY game in town… also, any increases in cost or lowering of care/services you would NOT have choice, as it is mandated in your taxes, and all they have to do is increase the tax, and as we all know, they are not shy in this area…

With the voucher system, two more advantages are:

  1. If you find a competing product that is less than what your voucher (collected from both employer and employee) is, YOU get to keep the money, redirect it to deductibles, etc. or just take the rebate…

  2. You get the benefit of the whole country in the insurance pool, which would LOWER the costs as a pool, and make the insurance companies COMPETE for these extra dollars… You can be sure that more insurance companies would pop-up.

Along with this, I believe that access to a larger pool of consumers will allow also allow the CONSUMERS to set the terms regarding enrollment guarantees, no discrimination on the basis of pre-existing conditions, and an annual open season, so that if your insurance company does not do what they say or treat you well, fire that insurance company, and hire another. They don’t want to participate in those pre-conditions, they don’t have to compete for the vouchers/money. The focus on this will FORCE the insurance companies to find ways to be more competitive or no money for them… Plans that deliver quality care will grow and be competitively priced to get access to as many of the vouchers/consumers as possible. Plans that do not will have to innovate/change to survive or fall to the way side, as they should.

Just look at what Geico did to the auto insurance industry… Could you imagine the same pitch in the health insurance industry… save 15% (and you get to do whatever it is you want with the savings)…

BUT, and here is the key, we would not be stuck with ONE insurance company or government if they did not deliver as promised. In the case of the government, it’s permanent… In the case of the company, it is only until the next annual enrollment period.

We should also remove the state-to-state conditions and let ALL insurance companies operate nationally, so if there is a program

Hooch, does that clear it up?..

I don’t buy the “competition makes things cheaper theory” at least NOT for the end user in this example. It makes things CHEAPER…But that CHEAPER isn’t the kind of CHEAP most folks find VALUE IN!! CHEAPER in this case means CHEAPER FOR THE INSURANCE COMPANY!!! Not cheaper for the subscriber. Insurance companies have competition NOW. Where’s all the savings???

As Hooch has clearly shown us “competition” in this example ended up being a group of insurance companies that got together and FIXED THEIR PRICES to ensure they made BARRELS full of money!!!

“There’s a lot more to an Insurance Company than just collecting the money.”

FINALLY…Something I can agree with Positive on!!!

There SURE IS more to running an Insurance company than COLLECTING MONEY…

They have to PAY MILLIONS in Politically contributions every year to protect one of THE MOST PROFITABLE business models in the U.S.

They have to pay LOBBYISTS to make sure Legislation that might eat INTO those FAT profits never see’s the light of day.

They have a systematic process of DENYING claims and covergage to users inorder to literally make them more MONEY!!! That takes EMPLOYEES…Lot’s of them. I have MET LIFES corporate head quarters about 10 miles from me. IT’S BIGGER THAN A COLLEGE CAMPUS and employs THOUSANDS. (remember the company motto…First try is DENY!!!)

They have a FLEET of Corporate Jets they have to pay for.

They pay their CEO’s like United Healths Bill McGuire, $125 MILLION in a single YEAR… and the profits are still so GIGANTIC that they can award him $600,000,000 in stock options!!!

NO…Don’t take THEM out of the picture…
They’re doing such a GREAT JOB of DRIVING DOWN costs!!!

Here’s an interesting analogy…

Remember the PHONE COMPANY 30 years ago when it was GOVERMENT CONTROLLED???

What was your BILL like THEN compared to now? And I’m talking in terms of TODAYS dollars…The answer???

When the GOVERMENT controlled the Phone company the average monthly bill was ONE QUARTER the cost it is TODAY…And that’s in 2009 dollars.

Anyone remember those old push button phones??? They weighed about 10 lbs…AND NEVER BROKE!!!

My buddy owns a Antique shop…He cleans out houses and sells the contents in his store…Want to know what sells the FASTEST???

THOSE 30 YEAR OLD AT&T, 10LB, push button phones.

I asked him WHY??? He said…Have you used one RECENTLY???

I said NO…

He gave me one…Said “go home and try it…Tell me what you think???”

UNBELIEVABLE!!! It was amazing…We’ve been SOLD GARBAGE made in China for so long we FORGOT what REAL QUAILTY was like!!!

That phone is BUILT LIKE A TANK…I never realized how much money the companies making phones today are SAVING on SPEAKERS and internal parts for the phones we buy. The CLEARITY of sound in that 30 year old phone was UNBELIEVABLE!!!

But…remember…30 years ago AT&T wasn’t trying to SQUEEZE every CENT of profit they could out of each phone. They built them to a standard and had almost NO competition.

If you see one of those old push button phones in a consignment shop or at a yard sale…Pick one up…My buddy sells them for $10 each. You know the ones…square shaped, hand set sits on top in the cradle.

Give one a try…That’s all we have in my house now…Even my wife was shocked at the difference!!

Competition, in SOME cases…IS NOT the answer…Health care has proven that for the last 20 years.

We HAVE competition RIGHT NOW…IT AIN’T WORKING!!!

“We HAVE competition RIGHT NOW…IT AIN’T WORKING!!!”

FDjake… while there is limited competition in the health insurance industry, it is muddled by large company policies vs. small company policies vs. government policies vs. individual policies fragmenting the risk pool and INCREASING costs across the board. Individual policies are more expensive because they are not part of the larger risk pool. Larger companies have better rates than smaller companies because of the larger pool.

There are multiple levels of marketing costs to all levels of business and government. AND corruption to go along with it… with the voucher program, they would ONLY market to the consumer, REDUCING marketing costs and sales costs and it would also alleviate corporate administration making companies MORE productive…

By including EVERYONE in the risk pool, make it so ALL insurance companies can operate nationally, increase the amount of users, remove pre-conditions, you switch ALL the marketing efforts BACK to the individual, and just like with auto, the competition for those dollars, and innovative ways to get there, will grow. If you’ll note, in the Auto industry, services and length of participation with one company, no claims ALL lead to lower rates… and with the voucher program, the CONSUMER gets to decide where the savings goes… if it is a TAX for a government run system, do you honestly think you will ever see it come back or the tax-payer given a choice on where the savings goes?

You also give EVERYONE access to the same healthcare programs across the board… These vouchers should also be applied to members of Congress, and have them live under the same laws they create for others…

On top of that, when the voucher is provided to the insurance company as payment, it eliminates the monthly payment cycles, and chasing after bounced checks, missed payments, cancellation/reinstatement, etc. removing alot of the administration…

Additionally, you remove alot of the corruption aspects, because they can’t pay off a congressman to get favorable treatment, because they no longer have control of the money, the consumer does…

The catastrophic flaw with nationalized healthcare, is that all the complaints anyone has with government or private-sector health insurance with be ENSHRINED in a government run program that has almost zero chance of being repealed, and change to it will not be driven by people, but politicians every two to fours years IF they have the votes… Besides, just where do you think the displaced health insurance employee’s will go for employment?.. straight to the government… They don’t need to be “retrained”…

With nationalized healthcare, you also move the corruption from the insurance company to ALL the other industries that would lobby for more money from the government for their services…

With regards to the phone… today, you can get local, national coverage with 25 additional services that didn’t even exist when the government had it for $25-$50/ month for a land line, and international rates for pennies instead of dollars… it was no where near that cheap JUST for a tank phone, and basic service… so I don’t know where you are getting those numbers from…

But, as we can see with cell phones, the larger the pool, the cheaper the price for the consumer with MORE and MORE services by innovative companies…

I agree the old land-line phones were built like tanks, but they had nowhere near the features we have now… So I really don’t see the analogy…

BTW, when the marketing to the consumers is the only one needed, what do you think the emphasis will be on?

That’s right, just like with Auto, it will be on more services, cheaper coverage… Because THAT is a great motivator for people…

So marketing to JUST CONSUMERS is the answer?

We can see how that’s been working now that Pharaceutical Companies are allowed to market DIRECTLY to the consumer.

Pharmaceutical companies once spent MILLIONS marketing to exclusively DOCTORS…They’ve slowed that to almost a TRICKLE, going so far as to lay off THOUSANDS of sales reps. WHY??? Because they use those funds to market to CONSUMERS NOW!!! Watch ANY nightly news cast …EVERY other commercial is for a drug!!!

Where’s all the cost savings THERE??? Why aren’t drug PRICES in the basement now??? A few years ago the GOVERMENT lifted the ban on direct marketing to consumers from drug companies. Using YOUR theory…Drug prices should be at ALL TIME LOWS because the CONSUMER can now ask for a certain companies drug over anothers.

BUT THAT ISN’T HAPPENING. DRUG PRICES ARE RISING!!!

The goverment opened the MARKET to these Drug companies. They did EXACTLY what your talking about…They let the CONSUMER have a choice…The THEORY said it should DRIVE DOWN DRUG PRICES…

It drove them all right…

It drove them to CANADA…and the DRIVING is being done by shipping companies that send those drugs to U.S. Citizens for PENNIES on the DOLLAR because the CANADIAN GOVERMENT provides NATIONAL Health Care for it’s people!!!

The only REAL answer in MY OPINION is to completely ELIMINATE Health Insurance companies. They would serve NO PURPOSE. The federal goverment is PERFECTLY set up for this.

They already set prices in other industries.
They collect money from citizens and have done so for DECADES.
They create the LAWS that this Country and the Health Care Industry run on.

The things they won’t do that INSURANCES COMPANIES do???

The Goverment won’t make BILLIONS of dollars per year in PROFIT!!!

They won’t deny citizens treatments or drugs based on projected PROFIT REPORTS. In the system we now have, it is LITERALLY in the best interest of the Insurance company to LET A PATIENT DIE rather than provide them with expensive treatments or drugs. They also deny people coverage with pre-existing conditons when THESE folks need the coverage more than ANYONE… And the really pathetic part of all of it???

Those decisions are COMPLETELY profit driven.

I know Positive can’t stand Obama…That’s fine…completely understandable and I WILL NOT argue his opinion on that…He’s 100% entitled to it…

But WATCH what these Health Insurance companies start doing here.
These guys are scared sh*tless right now. Your gonna see some MASSIVE cost cuts on Health Insurance, Drugs, and EVERYTHING else these scum bags touch. Your going to see EXACTLY how bad we’ve been screwed over the last 2 decades by these businesses. They KNOW they’re in the crosshairs and the PARTY is quickly coming to an end…(and when your leading CEO gets paid almost ONE BILLION DOLLAR$ IN A SINGLE YEAR??? That’s a PARTY!!!)

WATCH…That’s all I’m saying…Watch these RATS start clawing their way off the sinking ships.

The parties over boys…

POSITIVE can print all the VOUCHERS he wants…It WON’T MATTER!!!

He’s GETTING a DEMOCRATIC HEALTH CARE PLAN…Like it or NOT.

“So marketing to JUST CONSUMERS is the answer?”

No, that’s an oversimplification of it…

The pharmaceutical companies vs. the health insurance companies are two totally different concerns, and two totally different business models (i.e. - products vs. services). The health insurance companies PAY the pharmaceutical companies after all, NOT the other way around…

That’s like saying that just because Car companies advertise on TV, and their prices have ALSO gone up, auto insurance companies can’t reduce their costs with competition, WHICH THEY HAVE… BECAUSE they market the insurance products/services/savings DIRECTLY to consumers…

And in your example, assuming it had any application, the pharmaceutical companies would STILL be making the evil “profit” that you are so against (and EMPLOY people with, BTW) by putting the government in the place of the insurance company… Unless you want the government then to take over the pharmaceutical industry as well…

“LITERALLY in the best interest of the Insurance company to LET A PATIENT DIE than to provide them with expensive treatment or drugs”

FDjake… herein lies the distinction… if that is proven in the US, the insurance company is held LIABLE, in Canada, the GOVERNMENT does this ALL THE TIME, and the problem is widespread according to their own version of the Supreme Court… The difference? Because it is the Canadian government’s, it is EXTREMELY hard to bring a case against the province… Whereas you can walk into an ER in the US today, you can literally wait DAYS before you are admitted in Canada. Privatization is spreading in Canada (although illegal - doctors are begging them to challenge it), Britain, Switzerland… So the system that was supposed to be wonderful, is now not only NOT working but relying more and more on privatization to survive.

“They’ve slowed that to almost a TRICKLE, going so far as to lay off THOUSANDS of sales reps. WHY???”

No offense FDjake, but you don’t know what you are talking about here… They absolutely still market to doctors and do inservices… I know this because of family in the medical industry, but here is some additional information…

"Of the industry’s $57.5 billion marketing budget, 36% was spent on visits to physicians by industry representatives (“detailing”), 28% was spent on drug samples for doctors to give to patients, while only 7% was used for direct to consumer advertising. (Gagnon MA, Lexchin J. The Cost of Pushing Pills: A New Estimate of Pharmaceutical Promotion Expenditures in the United States. PLoS Med 2008). "
http://www.clinicalcorrelations.org/?p=737

I did a simple search to find you some info, so I’m sure you can find more… I am curious where you got your informaiton though to make such a statement… Where do you think all the doctor samples come from?

“They won’t deny citizens treatments or drugs based on projected PROFIT REPORTS.”

Yes, you are right, they will DENY treatment as they do now with government healthcare, and less than 45% survive the appeals process… then, like in Canada, you can either cross the border to get care outside the government dictated care, like you have to in Canada NOW… or break the law to see a physician in country but outside of the government plan…

And in Canada, which you like to reference as a model, you CANNOT do it privately, which is WHY people come to the US for treatment, INCLUDING their government officials…

FDJake… do me a favor… instead of being a distraction, let’s let this exercise play out and not come up with other distractions…

Don’t just say vouchers as I laid it out don’t work… say WHY it won’t work as it is laid out…