Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[stols001]

No I am saying that they probably were less profitable, but still profitable. Yes, they may have "lost money" compared to outright REFUSING to provide certain groups care. LOL. When I got to AZ, I had no insurance, but state funded care for my bipolar dx, and that I was not requesting ANY care related to that. It took me a while to get through EACH insurance company but their answer was similar: "Bipolar people die younger, usually and often in expensive ways, so even if your care for the psych side was "covered" we expect you to die early, in some horrible fashion." More or less.

So yes, they all have their "actuarial tables" and whatever, but my point is that there are enough healthy folks in the system to "offset" some of those costs, and probably the reason for the individual mandate.

IDK if you've ever been in a situation of needing insurance, not having it, and quite what that's like.... I genuinely believe that health insurance should NOT be dictated by the free market, although it is also one of the FEW things I believe don't fall under that category.

My second most WORST and EXPENSIVE insurance was when I worked at John's Hopkins. I was like, "Okay, so it sucks, but it's going to be great doctors, Hopkin's doctors, right?" Nope. Many doctors were terrible and many specialties had waiting lists, not so good for an HMO situation.

I am merely pointing out the limitations in a system that was designed to provide more insurance to more people. Any sane policy is either going to need to regulate and/or subsidize certain pools and areas. And, somewhat soon, I will do a search of "how much profit Insurance Companies made" in 2017. I'm fairly sure it will be eye opening.

If you are making a HUGE profit, however, any decrease in profit is going to be called a "loss." I would call that an "acceptable loss" most likely, but I'm sure the insurance companies don't view it that way.

So, subsidy or regulate, I don't much care, but frankly in my opinion, (and I've had no insurance, phenomenal insurance, and awful insurance, employed or not, diagnosed or not). I've experienced all of it, and let me tell you, a big part of me wishes I was native American, as man, that was my best insurance of all time, and were I native, I would have been paid on the "super secret Native pay scale" at my job, too. And, I'm not saying they can't do that, either, employers have every right to do that if they are NA, and even otherwise, if they so choose.....

I'm just saying health insurance needs an overhaul. I am also "no fan" of spending 200K to extend an elderly person's life 10 days, so the family can "be at peace." I know this gets into death pools, but if I were terminal, there is no WAY I would darken the doors of an ICU, I would go into hospice, a much better way to go, in my opinion and far cheaper. And yet, while everyone happens to LOVE to go on about the "cost of smoking" which is actually quite negligible, no one wants to take on the idea of "why should MY mommy" get to spend insane amounts of insurance company money to stay alive 10 more days, practically unconscious in the ICU.

Yep, no one wants to compromise anywhere, and I'm sure I'll get no love for the comment above, but I have an advanced durable power of attorney that specifies "no lifesaving measures" past a certain point. So, I do practice what I preach. ICU and hospital costs are outrageous, and the way they are abused in "hopeless" situations is also outrageous.

I think I should stop, although I AM glad to cut down my own personal healthcare costs by becoming a vaper.

Anna

 

[CMD-Ky]

I can't disagree that a large percentage of health care expense come in the final ninety or so days of life, all to no avail. I have heard of that expense being referred to as being a placebo for the family.

As an aside, I, too, have an an advance directive that distinguishes between the the inevitable process of disease and an occurrence. This distinguishes between my cancer process and a single occurrence such as an auto accident.

As to the "free market" in health care, health care financing or health care insurance, that animal has been extinct since July 30, 1965. Medicare sets its rates of reimbursement and the balance of a physician's office or hospital's operating revenue comes by over charging the "private pay" (sometimes called "no pay") and private insurers. Meaning that not only does one pay a Medicare tax when one is working, one also subsidizes Medicare through higher reimbursement rates from private money, your insurance premium.

The problems in healthcare financing were generated by the federal government, it is folly to expect the federal government to fix the problems that it has created. There is no way out of this mess, it will end with universal single payer (the government) healthcare. Health care will be rationed for most and a second higher tier care for the connected. I believe that is all by design but then my tin foil hat fits rather tight on my head.

No I am saying that they probably were less profitable, but still profitable. Yes, they may have "lost money" compared to outright REFUSING to provide certain groups care. LOL. When I got to AZ, I had no insurance, but state funded care for my bipolar dx, and that I was not requesting ANY care related to that. It took me a while to get through EACH insurance company but their answer was similar: "Bipolar people die younger, usually and often in expensive ways, so even if your care for the psych side was "covered" we expect you to die early, in some horrible fashion." More or less.

So yes, they all have their "actuarial tables" and whatever, but my point is that there are enough healthy folks in the system to "offset" some of those costs, and probably the reason for the individual mandate.

IDK if you've ever been in a situation of needing insurance, not having it, and quite what that's like.... I genuinely believe that health insurance should NOT be dictated by the free market, although it is also one of the FEW things I believe don't fall under that category.

My second most WORST and EXPENSIVE insurance was when I worked at John's Hopkins. I was like, "Okay, so it sucks, but it's going to be great doctors, Hopkin's doctors, right?" Nope. Many doctors were terrible and many specialties had waiting lists, not so good for an HMO situation.

I am merely pointing out the limitations in a system that was designed to provide more insurance to more people. Any sane policy is either going to need to regulate and/or subsidize certain pools and areas. And, somewhat soon, I will do a search of "how much profit Insurance Companies made" in 2017. I'm fairly sure it will be eye opening.

If you are making a HUGE profit, however, any decrease in profit is going to be called a "loss." I would call that an "acceptable loss" most likely, but I'm sure the insurance companies don't view it that way.

So, subsidy or regulate, I don't much care, but frankly in my opinion, (and I've had no insurance, phenomenal insurance, and awful insurance, employed or not, diagnosed or not). I've experienced all of it, and let me tell you, a big part of me wishes I was native American, as man, that was my best insurance of all time, and were I native, I would have been paid on the "super secret Native pay scale" at my job, too. And, I'm not saying they can't do that, either, employers have every right to do that if they are NA, and even otherwise, if they so choose.....

I'm just saying health insurance needs an overhaul. I am also "no fan" of spending 200K to extend an elderly person's life 10 days, so the family can "be at peace." I know this gets into death pools, but if I were terminal, there is no WAY I would darken the doors of an ICU, I would go into hospice, a much better way to go, in my opinion and far cheaper. And yet, while everyone happens to LOVE to go on about the "cost of smoking" which is actually quite negligible, no one wants to take on the idea of "why should MY mommy" get to spend insane amounts of insurance company money to stay alive 10 more days, practically unconscious in the ICU.

Yep, no one wants to compromise anywhere, and I'm sure I'll get no love for the comment above, but I have an advanced durable power of attorney that specifies "no lifesaving measures" past a certain point. So, I do practice what I preach. ICU and hospital costs are outrageous, and the way they are abused in "hopeless" situations is also outrageous.

I think I should stop, although I AM glad to cut down my own personal healthcare costs by becoming a vaper.

Anna

 

[stols001]

I don't actually think the government here can fix it, either....

IDK why some solutions work elsewhere, but not here. I do think the complexity and job loss and everything that would occur would not be of much benefit, period. Certain magical places do universal healthcare okay, but not for long, and certainly not given the economics that we have here. Job loss would be startling, would be the main thing.

I will say, of ALL governmental programs, I think SS has the best "rate" of return, in the sense that 1% of its costs are operating costs, but that doesn't really matter if the "funds" to support it have been stolen.

I also don't think a corrupt government, riddled with interest groups, is going to be able to make any stab at healthcare whatsoever. That was the one thing I really saw Obama wanting to see succeed, and it was a joke before it even rolled out. It was also kind of sad, listening to Obama's speeches-- I was highly interested in the beginning-- and his general outlook upon it as it... happened. That was going to be his "big" contribution to the US, and sadly, what happened seemed to make many things worse, not better.

It's depressing, for sure. But what we have now is completely inane, it's merely a giant snowball, gathering paper and prior auths as it sort of.... moves toward more of the same, but worse.

I'd love to offer a "solution" and I don't have one. Other than cutting down on healthcare costs overall, but to do that wipes out 50% of all healthcare jobs, which is the one "industry" that can't really be outsourced, at least completely.....

Anna

 

[r055co]

I refused to use the marketplace (not just for cost, but partially).. Back when it first appeared ,I checked out premium costs and what worried me more was the high risk pool (which I am among, but which most "purchasers" of Obamacare also had to buy) and being in AZ, where folks were underinsured, I was pretty certain a LOT of those insurers were going to bow out, because it was completely unaffordable for not just the consumer, but also the insurance companies.

Fast forward a few years later, and AZ had ONE "reputable" insurer (sort of BCBS) but ONLY if you were under 35 or something ridiculous. The rest were those "state created" plans, to which NONE of my doctors were willing to ascribe to, and I most certainly don't blame them.

I agree focusing on bringing costs down and malpractice cases makes more reasonable sense (I am not against suing one's doctor, although I have never done so, and did have an instance where I COULD HAVE and would have most certainly won, the doctor made an UNFORGIVABLE error and forced me to take a medication I shouldn't.) The fallout was terrible and lengthy, but I actually went BACK to that doctor (after a lengthy hospital stay) and the first words out of his mouth were, "I should ask you if you want to change doctors." LOL, he felt that bad.

I reassured him I wasn't into medical malpractice claims and kept him as my doc. He was the best (public assistance) doc I ever had after that, because he really didn't want to make another mistake. Most docs feel like that, after they break me once. And, he WAS the best public assistance doc I ever had.

I'm just pointing out that for me, it would have to be extraordinarily extreme (and mine was, just not enough to qualify, in my opinion) to sue a doctor, and although I think it should be an option, it also shouldn't necessarily be so easy to do and sometimes with extreme payouts. Looking at health care generally is probably a better approach.

I will say I've had friends where Obamacare completely changed their life, including one guy who was incapable of working outside the home, and had a live in GF with OCD. They both were able to get treatment, and become far more functional, eventually returning to work (and private healthcare). That is where Obamacare really does shine in my opinion, although it remains cumbersome, unaffordable, and unnecessarily penalizes employers and individuals making a decent wage but with no health insurance. If anything, I'd like to see Obamacare as a stepping stone to "decent' insurance but it does seem to have pulled ALL insurance for the most part, down to its own level.

I also don't believe that with the crazy premiums and increases everywhere that the insurance companies are not continuing to make money. They most certainly are. Cost containment should have been THE MOST MAJOR part of Obama care and it wasn't. The insurance companies could insure EVERYONE at a decent rate, and still not go bankrupt. Maybe high up execs would have to accept a 3 million yearly pay, not a 30 million dollar one, but they wouldn't go broke, by any means.

Just my thoughts as always.

Anna

The problem is that Insurance companies are the ones who wrote the bill, just like the ones who caused the banking melt down were put in charge of the recovery instead of going to jail.

Most of the 1st world country's have health care for their people that works well. Our government is so corrupt we are unable to come with a plan. The corruption is the reason I have been against Obamacare from the start.

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk

 

[Rossum]

I would love to chime in here with my thoughts, but I'm not going to contribute further to this thread's derailment.

 

[ScottP]

There is no way out of this mess, it will end with universal single payer (the government) healthcare. Health care will be rationed for most and a second higher tier care for the connected.

IDK why some solutions work elsewhere, but not here. I do think the complexity and job loss and everything that would occur would not be of much benefit, period. Certain magical places do universal healthcare okay, but not for long, and certainly not given the economics that we have here. Job loss would be startling, would be the main thing.

Most of the 1st world country's have health care for their people that works well. Our government is so corrupt we are unable to come with a plan. The corruption is the reason I have been against Obamacare from the start.

Universal health care is great if you are young, and healthy for the most part, and just have to periodically go in for check ups or minor injuries. It starts sucking once you get older and need something like a hip replacement. That is when your surgery gets scheduled for 3 weeks AFTER you die, whenever that may be. Got cancer? If you still have plenty of working years left they will do everything possible. If you are near or past retirement age, your treatment options are going to be "we can make you as comfortable as possible until you go", or "we can take you out back and shoot you now".

Not to mention, with medical treatment prices fixed, there is no benefit to seeking out new treatment methods. There is a reason the US system (for better or worse) is the leading innovator in medical procedures and equipment. Especially in the field of cancer research. That would go completely away.

Stols is right. The job loss would be severe. Just the top 2 insurance companies employ more than 3/4 million people (combined). All of those jobs would be lost right off the top. One more thing no one has mentioned, taxes would have to go up SIGNIFICANTLY to pay for it, driving the middle class further down into poverty.

Finally after reading many of the stories about mishandled funds, super long waiting lists, and poor treatment of vets by the government run VA, watching the waste and fraud in Medicare/Medicaid, and seeing how badly they mismanaged SS, I just can't say that I am interested in government single payer health care.

To tie this back into the actual topic of vaping regulations, I really don't see Congress doing much of anything else in terms of vaping. They had a shot and they chose to pass the buck to the FDA and wash their hands of it. Short of a miracle, we are going to be at the mercy of the FDA indefinitely.

 

[Bronze]

I can't disagree that a large percentage of health care expense come in the final ninety or so days of life, all to no avail. I have heard of that expense being referred to as being a placebo for the family.

As an aside, I, too, have an an advance directive that distinguishes between the the inevitable process of disease and an occurrence. This distinguishes between my cancer process and a single occurrence such as an auto accident.

As to the "free market" in health care, health care financing or health care insurance, that animal has been extinct since July 30, 1965. Medicare sets its rates of reimbursement and the balance of a physician's office or hospital's operating revenue comes by over charging the "private pay" (sometimes called "no pay") and private insurers. Meaning that not only does one pay a Medicare tax when one is working, one also subsidizes Medicare through higher reimbursement rates from private money, your insurance premium.

The problems in healthcare financing were generated by the federal government, it is folly to expect the federal government to fix the problems that it has created. There is no way out of this mess, it will end with universal single payer (the government) healthcare. Health care will be rationed for most and a second higher tier care for the connected. I believe that is all by design but then my tin foil hat fits rather tight on my head.

One wonders what the condition of our healthcare industry would have been without government and insurance company interference. Oh gee, we do have an idea. Remember Lasik's surgery? Once cost $80,000 and had mediocre success on a limited set of eye maladies. Now it costs about $1,500 with a high success rate over a broad spectrum of eye conditions. Hmmm, what about cosmetic surgery? Once relegated to the Hollywood elites is now commonplace in every big and small town covering dozens and dozens of human flaws that go way beyond butts and boobs. Wont even get into how affordable vet services remain versus human healthcare for the same surgeries. Lasik's, cosmetic, veterinarian...none were covered by government subsidies or insurance. Treat healthcare like we do any other product or service in this capitalist system and the prices come down and the quality goes up. What a surprise.

 

[Robino1]

Ahem....


Getting a bit derailed again. I know, I know.

Still need to get it back on the track.

 

[CMD-Ky]

I would love to chime in here with my thoughts, but I'm not going to contribute further to this thread's derailment.

I have fulfilled that task and, now, will withdraw following the lead of Rossum.

 

[CMD-Ky]

Ahem....


Getting a bit derailed again. I know, I know.

Still need to get it back on the track.

Will do, Mam.

 

[retired1]

Health care and insurance has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. Want to debate the merits of health care and insurance? Take it to Outside. Otherwise, back on topic.

 

[CMD-Ky]

Health care and insurance has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. Want to debate the merits of health care and insurance? Take it to Outside. Otherwise, back on topic.

I think that this has been mentioned before by another moderator (over two hours earlier), addressed by at least one of the offending parties and has been recognized.

Edited 7.27 PM EDT
@retired1 for notice

 

[Bronze]

Health care and insurance has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. Want to debate the merits of health care and insurance? Take it to Outside. Otherwise, back on topic.

yes we have been notified.

 

[stols001]

Apologies.

Anna

 

[Robino1]

Apologies.

Anna

Accepted

 

[gerrymi]

Accepted

Robin...at least your "OK Everybody...Get A Grip" post was polite and good-hearted...

..

 

[CMD-Ky]

Robin...at least your "OK Everybody...Get A Grip" post was polite and good-hearted...

..

@Robino1 and very effective, you got a "Will do, mam" from me.

 

[Bronze]

She recognizes we are adults.

 

[FlamingoTutu]

Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., on efforts to reduce tobacco use, especially among youth, by exploring options to address the role of flavors ‒ including menthol ‒ in tobacco products

 

[zoiDman]

She recognizes we are adults.

And Treats People like She would Like to Be Treated.

With Courtesy and Respect.