|
|
| Post Number: 1
|
Bass 
Group: Members
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
 |
Posted on: Oct. 03 2012, 6:55 am |
|
   |
Another of Obamacare's intrusions into the free market of health care and health insurance takes affect next year. See New Health Insurance Form
Most of us believe that in a free market economy, the burden to knowing what you are buying falls on buyers and consumers. We also believe that sellers have a legal obligation not to deceive us - and we have strict consumer laws to enforce that. For example, a seller cannot legally market a 4 pound sack of potatoes as weighing 5 pounds - or add water to something marketed as gasoline. Other than that, free market economics mean that the buyer must beware.
So the burden of reading all the pages of fine print, and knowing that his health insurance policy covers treatment for say, back pain, or cancer, falls entirely on the buyer - as long as the seller does NOT deceive us. This gives each health insurance provider a lot of latitude in defining what their "comprehensive health insurance" is, and what the definitions of terms like "standard medical practice" mean.
Less than ethical health insurance companies can wine and dine your company benefits manager and sell your company insurances that have fine print exclusions that pretty much makes the policy worthless. This gives that insurance company a competitive advantage over a more ethical competitor as long as they are skillful in burying the things that they don't cover in the many pages of legalese and fine print. That is why your company pays your benefits manager and a lot of lawyers and specialists a lot of money to read and understand that stuff so that they can compare policies and make an informed purchase.
That is the way that free markets work. And lots of people are employed both to generate the fine print, and to evaluate the fine print. As long as there is not deceit on the part of the seller, it is the buyer's responsibility to know what he is buying.
But Obamacare's new "Summary of Benefits and Coverage" rule intrudes into capitalistic free market principles by mandating that health insurance policies provide in a relatively short document in clear language what they are selling. The thick pages of legalese and fine print must be replaced with a relatively short standardized eight page summary that makes comparisons straightforward. This requirement violates the principles of free markets and the responsibility of buyers to know what they are buying.
This is another reason that Obamacare must be repealed. Free markets are the reason that America is the way that it is. Obamacare destroys free markets.
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 2
|
High_Sierra_Fan
Group: Members
Posts: 39516
Joined: Aug. 2005
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 03 2012, 11:04 am |
|
 |
"Free market"?
Too funny.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 3
|
davela
Group: Members
Posts: 659
Joined: Dec. 2011
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 03 2012, 6:36 pm |
|
|
So there is a dollar value on your health?There is no better example of an immoral concept than our healthcare racket.We have a long way to go in understanding this.Every other civilized nation on this earth has figured this out and they provide at less expense and have longer lifespans.We are neanderthals as far as social development is concerned.
*We need to figure out how we can make our country more civilized not how we can monetize every single need or facet of our lives.
--------------
Protect Greater Canyonlands!
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 4
|
hbfa
Group: Members
Posts: 7073
Joined: Feb. 2002
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 03 2012, 7:50 pm |
|
|
I'm with Bass.
Let's keep our health insurance contracts so complicated that we need to have an contract lawyer on retainer to decipher it for us.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 5
|
orygawn
Sleeping Bag Man!
Group: Members
Posts: 5688
Joined: Jul. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 03 2012, 7:53 pm |
|
|
So your idea of "free market" is that if your company is too small to hire an army of lawyers, or if you have an individual policy but no law degree........well, too bad. Die.
We can engrave that on their tombstones.
"Buyer Beware"
--------------
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. -- Galileo
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 6
|
nogods
Group: Members
Posts: 5410
Joined: Sep. 2007
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 03 2012, 8:15 pm |
|
|
In a true free market, there would be no safety or professional qualification standards whatsoever. As long as an auto manufacturer or meat processor or a doctor was willing to pay the market value of any death or injury their products or services might cause, then they could engage in selling their product or services without any societal oversight whatsoever. And as long as they were willing to pay for a non-disclosure agreement, they could keep such information from reaching the general public.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 7
|
|
|
| Post Number: 8
|
|
|
| Post Number: 9
|
HighGravity
Group: Members
Posts: 2322
Joined: Oct. 2009
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 04 2012, 8:16 am |
|
|
I'm not sure what planet Bass is from but his doctrine of kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out seems to have extended to healthcare. The "free market" is not what gave the US the "best healthcare system in the world." During our history of true free market enterprise, where government regulation was practically non-existent, doctors were often paid through bartering. People often died in childbirth, from polio, and from countless other illnesses that today are cured with routine treatment. It's now, in the age of Medicare, Medicaid, government backed student loans, government funded research grants, etc., that the US has moved to a world class system of health. Despite that, as most people who are awake know, we're still ranked 37th by the WHO which here in the real world means we do not have the "best healthcare system in the world."
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 10
|
BillBab
Group: Members
Posts: 4490
Joined: Sep. 2008
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 04 2012, 8:29 am |
|
|
(HighGravity @ Oct. 04 2012, 8:16 am)
QUOTE I'm not sure what planet Bass is from but his doctrine of kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out seems to have extended to healthcare. The "free market" is not what gave the US the "best healthcare system in the world." During our history of true free market enterprise, where government regulation was practically non-existent, doctors were often paid through bartering. People often died in childbirth, from polio, and from countless other illnesses that today are cured with routine treatment. It's now, in the age of Medicare, Medicaid, government backed student loans, government funded research grants, etc., that the US has moved to a world class system of health. Despite that, as most people who are awake know, we're still ranked 37th by the WHO which here in the real world means we do not have the "best healthcare system in the world."
So the cure for polio resulted from regulation
Who knew 
--------------
"Asking liberals where wages and prices come from is like asking six-year-olds where babies come from."
Thomas Sowell
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 11
|
High_Sierra_Fan
Group: Members
Posts: 39516
Joined: Aug. 2005
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 04 2012, 9:46 am |
|
|
It resulted from medical research Romney/Ryan wants to slash by two thirds.
I worked at the Salk Institute for fifteen years: cut federal medical research by two thirds as the Romney/Ryan budget Maths out in order to slash all federal discretionary spending by two thirds while increasing and locking in military spending at a fixed 4% of GDP without regard for threat, mission or needs and thats what we get; a ghost town.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 12
|
|
|
| Post Number: 13
|
GoBlueHiker
Obsessive Island Hopper...
Group: Members
Posts: 14069
Joined: Jul. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 04 2012, 12:32 pm |
|
|
What I find funny is that insurance companies have no issues hiring teams of lawyers to draft up plans that stretch on for many dozens of pages of legaleze, but if they're asked to give a one-page summary so people can understand it, they cry how "burdensome it is!" Waaaaaaahhh! "Oh, this is gonna bankrupt us!" Waah waah waaaahhh!
Please. Crocodile tears.
The only thing "burdensome" about this rule is that companies will have a harder time obfuscating facts and hiding coverage-denying loopholes from potential customers. Good.
--------------
Wealth needs more. Happiness needs less. Simplify.
www.RainForestTreks.com
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 14
|
TigerFan
Group: Members
Posts: 1995
Joined: May 2010
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 04 2012, 12:55 pm |
|
|
I do think it's time that we start acting more like consumers when it comes to medical insurance and care.
Try going to all of your medical care providers, like your doctor, pediatrician, urgent care, etc. and *ask* for a price-list of their services. You'll get a totally stunned response.
Imo, we don't ask these questions enough and demand straightforward answers from the providers as well as our insurance companies. Most of us don't even really know how health insurance companies work, especially their relationships with major hospitals and drug companies.
I'm all for this new provision of the health care law because I think it will help change our expectations as consumers. We don't have a right to complain unless we accept the responsibility to know what we're BUYING and insist on a better product.
--------------
Duct tape is like the Force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 15
|
|
|
| Post Number: 16
|
HighGravity
Group: Members
Posts: 2322
Joined: Oct. 2009
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 04 2012, 5:51 pm |
|
|
(BillBab @ Oct. 04 2012, 8:29 am)
QUOTE
(HighGravity @ Oct. 04 2012, 8:16 am)
QUOTE I'm not sure what planet Bass is from but his doctrine of kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out seems to have extended to healthcare. The "free market" is not what gave the US the "best healthcare system in the world." During our history of true free market enterprise, where government regulation was practically non-existent, doctors were often paid through bartering. People often died in childbirth, from polio, and from countless other illnesses that today are cured with routine treatment. It's now, in the age of Medicare, Medicaid, government backed student loans, government funded research grants, etc., that the US has moved to a world class system of health. Despite that, as most people who are awake know, we're still ranked 37th by the WHO which here in the real world means we do not have the "best healthcare system in the world." So the cure for polio resulted from regulation Who knew
I have a hard time believing you're really as dense as you want us to believe you are.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 17
|
CharlesTheHammer
Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: Jan. 2011
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 06 2012, 1:01 pm |
|
|
There are certainly a few good aspects of "The Affordable health care Act", such as preventing companies from dropping people with pre-esiting conditions, and allowing sons and daughters to stay on their parent's policies til around 25-27, but the problem is, a bill couldve been passed to put both of those provisions into law, without spending somewhere between 1-1.5 trillion dollars! All it wouldve cost was the salaries of the lawmakers while they debated it and voted for it, so maybe a few million bucks!
But, there is a reason I referred to Obamacare by its real name, which many have forgotten around the US. Thats because it was supposed to make health insurance more affordable! That was its most important goal, because health insurance premiums have continually gone up over the years. In fact, as was pointed out during the debate yet again, and not disputed by Obama, health insurance costs have gone up significantly since this law was passed!
Here's proof that health insurance costs have gone up significantly over the past 4 years. They do point out that Obamacare wasnt the main reason for higher health insurance costs, but thats not the point. "The Affordable Health Care Act" was supposed to make health insurance MORE affordable. Well, if health insurance costs have gone up significantly, then obviously it hasnt made health care costs more affordable. So it has failed in its most important goal!
http://www.factcheck.org/2011....remiums
But here's the biggest question I have: Libs have been screaming for single payer health care for a long time, and for us to move AWAY from private health insurance, because they are supposedly corrupt, etc., yet what Obamacare does, is the polar opposite of single payer health care, as it strengthens the private health insurance corps, by FORCING millions of Americans to buy health insurance from them, thereby making them more wealthy and powerful than ever before! I might have supported a reasonable plan for single payer, but this? Nope...
Do I need to post a link proving the Individual mandate here... I'm sure everyone heard about that, and saw the resulting court challenges.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 18
|
CharlesTheHammer
Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: Jan. 2011
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 06 2012, 1:23 pm |
|
|
(Bass @ Oct. 04 2012, 6:58 am)
QUOTE
(orygawn @ Oct. 03 2012, 6:53 pm)
QUOTE So your idea of "free market" is that if your company is too small to hire an army of lawyers, or if you have an individual policy but no law degree........well, too bad. Die.
We can engrave that on their tombstones.
"Buyer Beware" That is the way things are now. It is the buyer's responsibility to know what he is buying. That's the way free markets work. Obamacare is changing that next year. Free market economics gave the US the best health care system in the world. This new burdensome rule is just another example of how government rules and regulations are destroying America. More government interferences in free markets, all these regulations, are just leading us down the road to socialism.
There should be reasonable regulations and laws preventing nonsense like what happened with banks, lenders, which led us into the recession we are in now. But at the same time, we ALSO need to regulate govt institutions like Fanne/Freddie, which played a BIG role in the collapse, yet they dont seem to want to do anything about Freddie and Fannie, just leave it the same as it was, while coming up with failed regulations that allow a company like Corzine's to lose billions of dollars of customer's money! Then there's Dodd/Frank, which makes just a handful of HUGE banks too big to fail, and guarantees to bail them out when they screw things up again!
Anyway, some smart regulation is important, but not angry, punitive, redundant regulation that sends US companies to China where there is almost no regulation! That, and we need to both stop looking at gov't as either completely incompetent and inefficient, or to stop viewing gov't in such a rosy light that prevents us from ever trying to make it more efficient or effective.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 19
|
|
|
| Post Number: 20
|
Gabby
Group: Members
Posts: 5492
Joined: Jun. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 06 2012, 2:12 pm |
|
|
(CharlesTheHammerless @ Oct. 06 2012, 12:01 pm)
QUOTE "The Affordable Health Care Act" was supposed to make health insurance MORE affordable. Well, if health insurance costs have gone up significantly, then obviously it hasnt made health care costs more affordable. So it has failed in its most important goal!
The short answer has been posted:
(orygawn @ Oct. 06 2012, 12:33 pm)
QUOTE The rest of your post is irrelevant, since the most important parts of the law do not go into effect until 2014.
Why do you believe that you should be dealt with seriously if you simply continue to repeat the same, tired propaganda endlessly, without ever attempting to actually inform yourself?
Some people have to be “spoonfed”.
If you simply Google "cbo aca", the first entry is the CBO's page on the ACA. If you click that link, which should be (for your convenience):
http://www.cbo.gov/topics/health-care/affordable-care-act
you’ll get the CBO’s page on the ACA. On the lefthand side of the page, in the table, click “reports”. You’ll get the CBO ACA reports page. The very top line is the updated CBO cost report for the ACA insurance provisions.
If you click the link for the report at the top of that page, you’ll get to a summary page. On the lefthand side of the page, under “Full Report”, click “PDF”. This is the full, updated report on the CBO’s estimate of insurance costs, titled, strangely enough, “Estimates for the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act Updated for the Recent Supreme Court Decision”.
If you scan through that pdf report, you’ll eventually come to some tables. Go to the bottom table (Table 4, “Estimate of the Budgetary Effects of the Insurance Coverage Provisions Contained in the Affordable Care Act, Updated for Supreme Court Decision”).
Therein you will see several rows of estimates for the years 2012 through 2022. Note that the numbers start small, then progressively grow in size over time. Also note that most of the grand total in years 2012 and 2013 are the sum of the items “Exchange Subsidies and Related Spending” and “Small Employer Tax Credits”: it seems the government is giving out subsidies to those entities which implement exchanges – and there are other costs.
Note especially that the line labeled “Penalty Payments by Employers” curiously does not have a non-zero entry until 2014! Why is that, do you suppose?
Well, if you search this very document for the string “2014”, you will find it repeated quite often. Why is that, do you suppose?
http://cbo.gov/sites....tes.pdf
Again, not that no one has mentioned this before. You’ve simply chosen to ignore a salient fact about this which renders your “right wing blog” points entirely moot.
--------------
"I wouldn't even know how to begin to find the 'peyote lady', even if I thought it was possible in this incarnation...I'm completely tripped out on everyday life."
"By the way: where am I?"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 21
|
|
|
| Post Number: 22
|
High_Sierra_Fan
Group: Members
Posts: 39516
Joined: Aug. 2005
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 08 2012, 10:57 am |
|
|
Usually legislation's effect is best analyzed AFTER it goes into effect and not a couple years before?
"But, there is a reason I referred to Obamacare by its real name, which many have forgotten around the US. Thats because it was supposed to make health insurance more affordable! That was its most important goal, because health insurance premiums have continually gone up over the years. In fact, as was pointed out during the debate yet again, and not disputed by Obama, health insurance costs have gone up significantly since this law was passed!"
FAIL: Unless, of course, it actually IS 2014 and I'm very behind on my calendar purchases.
Oh and keeping the young adult coverage and pre-existing condition exclusion ban requires the personal responsibility mandate that Governor Romney and the Heritage Foundation and the Republican party so eloquently argued. No free lunches, the money has to come from somewhere and that
"somewhere" is best by expanding the people participating in the system.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 23
|
|
|
| Post Number: 24
|
High_Sierra_Fan
Group: Members
Posts: 39516
Joined: Aug. 2005
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 08 2012, 1:53 pm |
|
|
(Drift Woody @ Oct. 08 2012, 10:24 am)
QUOTE
(Bass @ Oct. 08 2012, 9:50 am)
QUOTE It is up to the buyer to understand what he is purchasing. If the buyer has a pre-existing condition and there is no law in place requiring the private insurance company to provide coverage for that illness without increasing the price of the policy based on the projected cost of treatment for that illness, the buyer cannot afford to purchase the insurance, period. And that's why a "free market" health insurance system can never provide the coverage for everyone who needs it.
So does Romney not know that or simply not care?
I'm judging the latter: "victims" being what they are according to Mr. 47% are on their own.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 25
|
|
|
| Post Number: 26
|
|
|
| Post Number: 27
|
Drift Woody
Group: Members
Posts: 5299
Joined: Feb. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Oct. 09 2012, 4:47 am |
|
|
(Bass @ Oct. 09 2012, 2:16 am)
QUOTE Drift Woody QUOTE If the buyer has a pre-existing condition and there is no law in place requiring the private insurance company to provide coverage for that illness without increasing the price of the policy based on the projected cost of treatment for that illness, the buyer cannot afford to purchase the insurance, period.
And that's why a "free market" health insurance system can never provide the coverage for everyone who needs it.
That is true and has always been a characteristic of the US health care system. If you can't afford health insurance, and you get sick, you just die. That is just the way that free market capitalistic economies work. It is also a major reason that Americans work harder and more hours with less vacation time than workers in other developed economies. It is also why Americans have one of the highest standards of living in the world.
Letting Americans get sick and die when they can't afford health insurance is neither a motivation to work harder nor does it contribute to a higher standard of living. A lot of Americans who've worked hard and played by the rules have gone bankrupt due to our health insurance system that is more expensive and provides less coverage than every other Western democracy, some of which have a higher standard of living than ours.
Bankruptcy and eviction are not positive economic consequences, and forcing people without insurance to wait until their illness is acute enough for an emergency room visit is a cost picked up by everyone else. It is an indicator of a LOWER standard of living, as is having less vacation time.
We can't claim to be the greatest nation on earth while failing to provide adequate health care for a sixth of our population and letting our citizens get sick and die. This is a national shame & embarrassment, and I find it difficult to understand how any moral human being or patriotic American can possibly think it is a good thing.
--------------
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.
-- Native American proverb
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 28
|
|
|
| Post Number: 29
|
|
|
| Post Number: 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
Survival Skills 101 • Eat Better
