Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 28 of 28

Thread: Catastrophic medical insurance

  1. #16 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Where Woke Goes to Die
    Posts
    14,127
    Thanks
    10,362
    Thanked 8,959 Times in 6,246 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 483 Times in 453 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
    Trump Diva, until the catastrophic medical expense has occurred, it pays nothing to refund the payer or compensate to provider for medical goods and services provided on behalf of an individual patient. Medicare's schedules of prices are an example of a federal price schedule for legitimate medical expenses.

    I used the word “superior” as a comparative adjective regarding determination of price or cost/benefit.

    Respectfully, Supposn
    Medicare's contracted rates do not pay providers fairly for their services. If a doctor had to rely solely on Medicare payments, they would be out of business.

  2. #17 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    367
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 69 Times in 47 Posts
    Groans
    4
    Groaned 6 Times in 6 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aloysious View Post
    Does it cover what the guidelines for the ACA are?
    If not it should not be considered valid insurance for tax purposes.
    Aloysious, federal catastrophic medical insurance would be an entitlement mutually exclusive to any medical plan or to taxes.
    It doesn’t require that that a patient who’s a legal USA resident had been insured.
    It’s a proposed improvement for our nation’s current and whatever is likely to be our future medical care policies.

    Respectfully, Supposn

  3. #18 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    26,548
    Thanks
    9,555
    Thanked 11,904 Times in 7,964 Posts
    Groans
    2,333
    Groaned 1,669 Times in 1,547 Posts

    Default

    I have for years believed that catastrophic illness and injury should be covered by the Feds.

    Anything over $25,000 to $30,000 dollars anyway.
    https://i.postimg.cc/PqVCnGks/gojoe1.jpg
    C'MON MAN!!!!

  4. #19 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    26,548
    Thanks
    9,555
    Thanked 11,904 Times in 7,964 Posts
    Groans
    2,333
    Groaned 1,669 Times in 1,547 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trump Diva View Post
    Medicare's contracted rates do not pay providers fairly for their services. If a doctor had to rely solely on Medicare payments, they would be out of business.
    Or they'd have to drive less expensive, less ostentatious cars. Maybe live in slightly less expensive homes.

    There's a young, hot-shit, part-time staff doctor at a for profit nursing home near here, he also has his own practice, who drives up to the place in his Ferrari.

    Not kidding.
    https://i.postimg.cc/PqVCnGks/gojoe1.jpg
    C'MON MAN!!!!

  5. #20 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    5,166
    Thanks
    1,138
    Thanked 2,495 Times in 1,799 Posts
    Groans
    7
    Groaned 171 Times in 164 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
    Aloysious, federal catastrophic medical insurance would be an entitlement mutually exclusive to any medical plan or to taxes.
    It doesn’t require that that a patient who’s a legal USA resident had been insured.
    It’s a proposed improvement for our nation’s current and whatever is likely to be our future medical care policies.

    Respectfully, Supposn
    That's an idea I never heard before. Sounds good to me. Who came up with that?

  6. #21 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    367
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 69 Times in 47 Posts
    Groans
    4
    Groaned 6 Times in 6 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trump Diva View Post
    Medicare's contracted rates do not pay providers fairly for their services. If a doctor had to rely solely on Medicare payments, they would be out of business.
    Trump Diva, when medical service or product providers accept a Medicare patient and payment from Medicare, they’ve agreed to accept Medicare’s price schedules as the full prices. No one is required to accept Medicare patients, (beyond whatever legal and/or professional duties are required of them).

    Respectfully, Supposn

  7. #22 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    367
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 69 Times in 47 Posts
    Groans
    4
    Groaned 6 Times in 6 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aloysious View Post
    That's an idea I never heard before. Sounds good to me. Who came up with that?
    Aloysious, the concepts of high-deductible insurance policies or insurers contracting with re-insurers or insurance “pools” to “lay off” a proportion of their risks they cannot financially “cover”, are familiar concepts within the insurance industry. "Bookies" do it when they're hollding too much bets on a long-shot.

    Respectfully, Supposn

  8. #23 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Where Woke Goes to Die
    Posts
    14,127
    Thanks
    10,362
    Thanked 8,959 Times in 6,246 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 483 Times in 453 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
    Aloysious, the concepts of high-deductible insurance policies or insurers contracting with re-insurers or insurance “pools” to “lay off” a proportion of their risks they cannot financially “cover”, are familiar concepts within the insurance industry. "Bookies" do it when they're hollding too much bets on a long-shot.

    Respectfully, Supposn
    Can you state in a sentence or two what you are proposing? I'm not clear on it.

  9. #24 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    367
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 69 Times in 47 Posts
    Groans
    4
    Groaned 6 Times in 6 Posts

    Default

    Catastrophic annual medical expenses on behalf of individual insured patients is unusually much greater expense on behalf of an individual, that exceed what’s more generally required for other patients’ annual care; (i.e. far exceeds what an insurer expects to generally pay within a year on behalf of an individual patient).

    Prohibiting or otherwise effectively denying insurers the right to refuse higher-risk applicants with undesirable medical conditions, significantly increases the financial risks, the expected costs, and consequentially the prices of those insurance plans.

    Individuals’ catastrophic medical expenses per capita are expected to occur more frequently among those with prior undesirable medical conditions when they applied for medical insurance.

    Federal insurance of catastrophic medical expenditures on behalf of all patients that’s not a cost to their insurers, would significantly increase the affordability and sustainability of ANY medical insurance plan and it would particularly reduce the increased costs and prices due to any pre-existing medical conditions of those persons insured.

    Respectfully, Supposn

  10. #25 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    367
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 69 Times in 47 Posts
    Groans
    4
    Groaned 6 Times in 6 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trump Diva View Post
    Can you state in a sentence or two what you are proposing? I'm not clear on it.
    Trump Diva, sorry, not in two sentences.

    It’s proposed when a patient’s annual medical expenditures reach the “catastrophic amount”, the federal government should assume the medical insurance of that patient for no less than that day, the previous 365 days and the following 365 days. Federal assumption of the patients’ medical expenses shall continue beyond that until the medical expenditures on behalf of the patient do not exceed 15% of the catastrophic amount within a 365 days duration.

    Catastrophic medical insurance should be patient’s entitlement regardless if the patient, (who’s a legal USA resident), was or was not previously insured.
    The legally defined “catastrophic amount” should be annually adjusted to retain its purchasing power. Medicare is an example of price schedules for authorized medical goods and services.

    Respectfully, Supposn

  11. #26 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    367
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 69 Times in 47 Posts
    Groans
    4
    Groaned 6 Times in 6 Posts

    Default

    I originally posted this topic last year within a different group. The link from which I quote is from a NY Times article dated July 3, 2018 and was linked the next day within an MSN web site. The article's title is entitled “Obamacare Is Proving Hard to Kill”, by Reed Abelson.
    ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
    Originally Posted by Supposn
    Individuals’ Catastrophic Medical costs:

    Federal insurance for catastrophic medical costs on behalf of individuals:

    Excerpted from Congressman Paul Ryan’s website. He forwarded a transcript concerning his positions of regarding USA’s healthcare policies; Racine [WI] Journal News, Mark Schaaf, July 7, 20217.
    “Republicans have proposed the federal and state governments subsidize the cost of care for people in the individual market with catastrophic illnesses, Ryan said. He believes that will make it easier to insure people in those high-risk pools at a more affordable price”.

    Paul Ryan’s advocating federal insuring catastrophic medical costs of individuals. That’s a concept that both sides of the political aisle could agree upon.
    I’m a proponent for federal acceptance of fiscal responsibility for catastrophic medical condition regardless if patients were or were not previously insured. Hospitals must be reimbursed for those extraordinary expenditures.
    /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
    Excerpted from:
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/03/h...nce-rates.html
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ob...cid=spartanntp

    “...In Minnesota, which created a reinsurance program to help pay for customers’ expensive medical conditions, carriers are actually seeking lower premiums. A midlevel policy in Minneapolis is priced at $302 a month. ...”.

  12. #27 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    6,560
    Thanks
    40
    Thanked 2,936 Times in 2,054 Posts
    Groans
    852
    Groaned 948 Times in 862 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mohamud Loves Bukkake View Post
    Complete crock of shit

    First of all, the purpose of Medicare Advantage is because your vaunted Medicare doesn't cover everything. It has holes. People pay for Medicare D
    Advantage out of their own pockets.

    Your entire thesis falls apart because you began with a flawed premise


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Hole? Medicare pays 80 percent, just like it always has.

  13. #28 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    367
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 69 Times in 47 Posts
    Groans
    4
    Groaned 6 Times in 6 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Life is Golden View Post
    Medicare's contracted rates do not pay providers fairly for their services. If a doctor had to rely solely on Medicare payments, they would be out of business.
    Life is Golden, Medical services providers are not required, they chose to accept Medicare patients and agreed to accept Medicare’s rates. They are free to opt out of the system whenever they choose to do so. Apparently, it’s to their perceived advantages not to do so.

    Respectfully, Supposn

Similar Threads

  1. Anthropologic catastrophic apocolyptic global warming
    By Cancel 2018.1 in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 08-03-2017, 08:02 AM
  2. Why should cigarette smokers be entitled to medical insurance
    By TheDonald in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-08-2017, 05:50 AM
  3. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-25-2016, 12:07 PM
  4. Obama’s Catastrophic Gitmo Failure - An Absence of Will
    By blackascoal in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-30-2013, 10:59 AM
  5. Cuba to require medical insurance for visitors
    By RockX in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-08-2010, 10:09 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •