Because our out of pocket costs have been plummeting.


http://american.com/archive/2010/januar ... f-no-price

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

This article assumes that people have the control of their medical decisions and know what's best for themselves as rational consumers. I doubt that. People take their doctors' advice, and their doctors have a vested interest in seeing their patients get as much treatment as possible in the current system. Honestly, I see no solution to cost problems in there. Basically it just seems to say "give the consumer more choice, that'll work". Just a tired rehashing of the old "government is always less efficient" line. I'm not buying that as a solution.

Acually Stuuuuuu, "give the consumer more choice" is the absolute correct option. Medical needs are not a right, they are a consumed good. To nationalize the Healthcare system in an effort to stem costs puts an undue and unjust burden to the rest of the tax paying citizen.

Think of it this way, I don't get to say how you eat, treat your body, tell you not to do something to minimize risk of injury, etc...etc....., if I were to have those powers, it would infringe on your free will as well as your rights under the Constitution of the United States of America. You know, the document which lays out the foundation of law for our nation.

With that being a good case in point to make, why should I be made to foot the bill as a taxpayer without a say so in any individuals life to minimize that tax? Because this nation is built upon the principals of freedom, I should not be held financially accountable because someone smokes, over eats or performs high injury risk events.

Medial care in this nation works under the free market principals, having government step in does not help, it hinders the markets of Medical care and actually creates a brueacratic nightmare, increasing costs, slow delivery of the service and actually puts more of the population at risk on several levels.
Not one, not one single one of the "Social Programs" this nation has implented at the Federal level has ever controlled its costs, offered a viable solution to a problem or contributed to the longterm success of this nation. Every one of them has led to more deficits, more debt and more tax increases, thereby reducing the purchasing power of the American consumer, who happens to be the American Citizens.

_________________
Lord Stanley's Cup is what its all about.
Mr. Pegula, your destiny awaits you sir.

Doesn't your premium come "out of pocket" one way or the other anyways? Eventually all the cost comes out of pocket. It's not like insurance companies are a benevolent creature which takes one for the team. It's the opposite. They are there to pay all the costs PLUS profits.

Who "other" than the consumer is paying the costs if the consumer is paying only 12%? The government?? Well, they ARE the consumer aren't they?? If the insurance companies are paying 88% AND STILL MAKING PROFITS, then I'll assume that's because they charge high premiums, right???

...and "over consume"? If they insinuate people go to the doctor just for shits and giggles, then they've never been to the doctor before. "over consume" what a shitty term even. Babies need to stop over consuming heart monitors.


The idea is to make medical need a right. Face the facts, we ALL need medical care. It's not as "optional" as you'd like it to sound. If we all need it, then why not just share the costs?? That's the way the insurance companies work anyways, right?? I'd also like to know how you're so sure the government wil fuck it up, while the private industry is such a darling. Right now, lot's of people have no insurance, so the system sucks. You rag on social programs, but social security has kept quite a few elderly Americans warm and fed hasn't it? I'm sorry, but you seem to be just towing the line here.

Do you buy the Senate bill as a solution?

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

I hear what your saying daz, and don't get me wrong, it would be nice if there was an actual plan of action that stabilizes costs and allows a "medical care for all" system to operate with hard numbers that CAN BE controlled on the cost side.
Medical care IS NOT NOR NEVER HAS BEEN a right. It should not be a right. Let me explain, local governments (i.e. county and municipal) can have hospitals setup on there budget, at the local level. It can never, never be done at the state or federal level, population centers shift, new ones pop up, people move around, therefore, they should be the ones to foot the bill for emergency medical care (i.e. building hospitals, clinics) in thier own area.

But lets call it for what it is, it is a government social program daz, plain and simple. Take a good look at medicaid/medicare or social security, hell, take a good look at every government run social program. Not one of them has ever controlled costs, I'm sorry daz, but facts are facts. You cannot continue to raise the tax rate on the citizens of this nation.

People tend to forget, or just ignore the fact that one of the original reasons we seperated from England was because of the tax situation, not just without representation, but the fact that taxes kept going up or new ones were created.
There is no such thing as "TOWING THE LINE" when it comes to this subject. My beliefs and millions like myself in this nation hold true to the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. We do not subscribe to Marxisism, Socialism style of government, it that is the way the country is headed, I will give my last breathe fighting it, either with a pen and paper, or with a gun in my hand. Thats how strongly I feel on this subject daz.

_________________
Lord Stanley's Cup is what its all about.
Mr. Pegula, your destiny awaits you sir.

Of course not, but my opinion is that that bill does not give the government enough control, through things like an easily-available public health plan and price controls, which are not in the bill. Too much government involvement isn't my gripe with the bill.

Ok, since people seem to like social programs that take from my pocket, I am demanding that all risky behavior stop.
I demand, as a payer of your health care, the following"

1. Your children will not be allowed to play any sports, ride a bike, run down the street or do any other behavior that puts my pocket book at risk.
2. You and your family, (Wife, children) cannot be allowed to go on camping trips and climb hills/mountains, go to the creek, canal, stream, river or lake and go swimming or do any other family outing that puts my pocket book at risk.
3. You will not be allowed to do any activity that is not covered by insurance that would put your actions on the "National Medical Insurance Program" list of high risk people, furthermore, anytime you, your wife or your children that are under your care have an incident, I demand your contribution to the "National HealthCare System" go up 20% for not more than 10 years, not less than 5 years.

Failure to comply with my demands constitutes a breach of civil rights as a citizen, and as such I demand justice.
Are you getting what I am saying here? You cannot force feed people this program, it has no balancing mechanism and actually promotes risky behavior.
Shall I continue?

_________________
Lord Stanley's Cup is what its all about.
Mr. Pegula, your destiny awaits you sir.

I understand your position on government slesh, but I think it's kind of dated. The ideas that politicians had in 1780 are a bit different than reality now. My point is simply that a government system is virtually no different than a private one. What is the difference if you're paying premiums to a company which is working to ensure that shareholders who do NOTHING get a good chunk of the premium, or if they take the money directly out of your taxes to pay the costs(with no shareholders getting anything). Seems easier to cut out the shareholder, imo.

Also, you are currently paying for your neighbors bad behavior. Do ya want to know why your premiums are high? I'll tell you; because smokers, obese people, and alcoholics are more costly to take care of.

By 'towing the line' I meant that you are just refusing to look at it realistically, and assuming the current system is good. Believe it or not, whether it's private or government owned, you will face the same problems. There will be costs and they will need to be paid, but the bottom line is that we ALL NEED coverage, and that's why I don't look at it as a "socialist" issue. It's like saying sharing air is socialist.

As for controlling costs, a government program is always overseen by YOUR REPRESENTATIVES. If he fails to control costs, then you can always vote for a guy you think will. I think you're under the assumption that representative government is not working for you the way it should be(and you're right). Maybe THIS is where you should be directing your fervor.

Wrong. Private plans make money, government run plans lose money.
Government run plans also deny more claims than the private industry by both volume and as a percentage.

What's the difference?
Choice.
I can choose to invest in a health care company instead of having the federal government put a gun to my head and pick my pocket.

They're not.

No, we all need access to health care...not insurance coverage.

Are you serious?
really?


We're funding current and future entitlements with deficit borrowing right now....without health care reform piled on top of that.
Google around for the unfunded liabilities of the Federal government and come back and explain to me how they can afford to subsidize private health insurance for everyone that doesn't have coverage currently.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Private plans make money? O'Rly, do they just print it, or do they suck off the fed reserve for it? ...and where does the govt plan lose money? Into a black hole?

Look I could argue you point for point, but you're always going to say the government is worse for no apparent reason. I'll draw a chart here:

Current system:
Entrepreneur
Hospital
Customer

New system:
Government
Hospital
Consumer

As it is, who watches the Entrepreneur? No one.

As it will be, who watches the government program? Your representatives. Who watches them? Supposedly YOU. So basically, if the government plan fails, then it's YOUR fault. If the entrepreneur's plan fails, then he gets a taxpayer bailout.

A government plan DOES NOT have to mean 'no choice'(there will still be a lot of hospitals and different doctors -in fact the same amount there was before)

Health care costs ARE HIGH, and are continuing to skyrocket.

Finally, as you said, we all need health care, not insurance coverage. Whether the pool of cash comes from taxes or through premiums it STILL comes out of our pockets one way or the other. You could just as easily say that the insurance company is holding a gun to your head to get you to pay your premium, the same way that your electric company does, except THEY decide how big of a gun they want to use w/o you having ANY say at all. With a government program, you will have ALL THE SAY.

I know you are Libertarian, so debating this with you is like trying to get you to change your sexual preference, but these aren't the pre-interstate commerce days anymore. The post-agrarian era is too complicated for simple libertarian ideals anymore. If it were 1800, I'd probably have the exact same political stance as you.

Actually, I don't pay for anyones bad behavior, I pay my medical by cash.............
Which means I don't have to worry about premiums.
As for NEED, why should I pay for your NEED? You certainly aren't reaching into your pocket to break out some cash to help pay for my doctors visit.
I think you missed my point entirely. You are forcing this on me, what don't you get about that. I can't just stop paying income tax. You are taking a portion of the money that I give to the government to operate and utilizing it for your own needs.
I mean, really man, why don't you kick my dog while your at it.

_________________
Lord Stanley's Cup is what its all about.
Mr. Pegula, your destiny awaits you sir.

Same thing happens when someone a few blocks away from you has a fire at their house and the firefighters come to put it out. That's YOUR tax money going to someone else!!! How unamerican!!! How about those two Gulf wars you fought in that I never, ever supported? That was MY tax money going to YOUR interests. Are you going to argue to me that public money shouldn't be used to put out fires on private property? Because that's where your argument leads to logically.

We pay for the same highways, garbage collection, snow plowing, schooling, etc. Don't we??

BTW, I hope you never develop a serious medical condition with your "pay cash" mentality, unless of course your parents left you a ton of money or a business. Most people don't have that option.

As for need, under a government program, I WOULD be willing to open up my wallet to pay for your serious illness. I don't have to give to charity to be a good person, do I?

The tax money will be utilized for "us" not "me". This is totally a 2 way street here. You act like you're gonna be taxed thrice to pay for everyone elses medical coverage while we leave you lying in a ditch somewhere? You will be taxed appropriately(hopefully) for YOUR SHARE of medical coverage. If the system in place sucks, and you feel you are paying too much, then write your representative(like I hope everyone would). If he fails to be fair to us all, then we'll vote him out, and vote in a guy who will.

Didn't see this, or I'd have probably not posted mine.

I'm single, have had no serious medical problems. Don't smoke.

My premiums have gone up 65% in the 5 years I've been with the same company, same insurance company and plan. That 65% increase includes a reduction in premiums 2 years ago when we were properly rated for risk. (

(The majority of our employees are call center staff, younger college kids doing tech support and customer service. We had previously been paying premiums based on an assumption of a more mature employee base that used their insurance more.)

I can't agree that health care is not expensive. Too many things in the system are built to keep costs up in the name of capitalism.

- Pharmaceutical companies shouldn't be allowed to advertise their concoctions on prime time TV. Make your drugs. If my doctor tells me I need it, I'll buy it. Stop making the costs higher to support an advertising budget.

- Insurance companies should be allowed to make a profit, but not at the expense of people's lives. You shouldn't have to chase them around for months when you submit a valid claim under the policy you paid for, if you can get paid at all. People with insurance shouldn't have to be scared to go to see a doctor because they're scared to get crazy bills later. Their issues get worse, and it costs more later when it's more serious.

- Malpractice lawsuits need to be reformed. Legitimate mistakes are one thing, but suing your doctor for bullshit reasons because you know you can get a settlement out of it is insane.

Does the government need to take over healthcare? I don't think so. (Nor do I buy the talking point that the public option was destined for that outcome.) However, the government needs to oversee these corrupt bastards who hold people's lives in their hand to satisfy Wall Street's insatiable expectations for profit margins.

I don't have kids. I don't utilize any services paid for by the City of Niagara Falls Central School District.

Why should I pay school taxes then?

Medicare is insolvent and Private insurance companies make a profit.
How can you not understand that?
Medicare also denies care at a greater rate while running at a net loss.

No amount of arguing is going to change that fact.

Listen...you're arguing for a government run plan...fine. THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE GETTING.

What we are getting is a mandate to buy private insurance with no cost controls and a massive expansion of unfunded liabilities.
I would actually be happier if the Democrats said screw it and went full Canadian or UK on us...those systems make way more sense that the crap in the Senate bill.
This is a windfall for the insurance companies and an ass raping for John Q. taxpayer.

Are you defending the Senate bill?

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Cross, in the OP, you never really framed this as an argument against the current bill. My interpretation after reading the article was that you were arguing against government involvement in healthcare, and that is mainly what I, and perhaps others, have been debating about. I won't defend the Senate bill because it's a steaming pile of shit, but I view that as a separate issue from "why healthcare costs are high".

Ok daz, lets look at it from my point of view just for a second here.
The founding fathers firmly believed in capitalism, they founded the nation as a Rebublic but the principals governing how one should represent were the same as they are today. That has not changed one bit. It is a set of principals based on honesty, integrity and moral obeyance.
You are debating with an individual (myself) who firmly believes that the number one problem with this nation is the "welfare" mentality of so many people. The government was not created, nor was it ever intended to care for its citizens from craddle to grave.
There are very few responsibilities the government should have. Defense of Nation, National land usage, Natural resource usage and Relations with other Nations.

Alliance with none, Commerce with all. - Thomas Jefferson

History affords us many instances of the ruin of states, by the prosecution of measures ill suited to the temper and genius of their people. The ordaining of laws in favor of one part of the nation, to the prejudice and oppression of another, is certainly the most erroneous and mistaken policy. An equal dispensation of protection, rights, privileges, and advantages, is what every part is entitled to, and ought to enjoy... These measures never fail to create great and violent jealousies and animosities between the people favored and the people oppressed; whence a total separation of affections, interests, political obligations, and all manner of connections, by which the whole state is weakened. - Benjamin Franklin


If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds. This forms a complete barrier against any material oppression of the citizens by taxes of this class, and is itself a natural limitation of the power of imposing them. -Alexander Hamilton

These are but a few of the many great statements made by some of the founders who saw the very doom of programs like this national healthcare program. The same would be true of Social Security, Medicare and a host of other government programs.

I think you are completely missing the larger picture here. This nation is in serious trouble specifically because it failed to adhere to the principals of the Constitution and the overwhelming governmental meddaling in regional or local affairs through programs such as this.

The real problem is you are a citizen, you hold the highest title in the land and you are actually promoting the demise of this nation. daz, you really need to look at spending, it has been the downfall of every empire and countless nations through history. This nation is well on that path, this program adds to that problem, it takes into account a 10 year program, thats it.
Social Security did the same, then came the baby boom, ooooooooops, no solution for that problem. Hmmmm, I guess the nation will have to go into debt, now won't it.
I'm sorry daz, but myself and people that see the real truth of the danger of this will never cede our position.
I absolutely will not pay for your healthcare, don't worry about mine, I will take care of my family and myself.

_________________
Lord Stanley's Cup is what its all about.
Mr. Pegula, your destiny awaits you sir.

Great point Squanto, I don't believe you should. Period.

_________________
Lord Stanley's Cup is what its all about.
Mr. Pegula, your destiny awaits you sir.