Topspin
Verified User
TYPICAL GED response, putting words in others mouths cuase your not educated enough to stay on point.
A REAL American hero
- Thread starter Bfgrn
- Start date
TYPICAL GED response, putting words in others mouths cuase your not educated enough to stay on point.
Bfgrn
New member
Only if you put money before human life.
Rationalist
Hail Voltaire
Obviously, our current system is screwed up - unlike many on the right, I will not pretend otherwise. That said, I do not believe (federal) government takeover or single payer is the best approach. Cases such as Nataline Sarkisyan occur in countries with government-run healthcare, too.
One that comes to mind is that of Jonathan Simms, a teenager in Northern Ireland who contracted Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, more commonly known as mad cow disease. His parents had to fight the government for an experimental treatment that would potentially stop the disease from progressing. By the time they secured the treatment (which did stop the disease from spreading further), it was too late. The teenager entered a PVS and died a couple weeks ago.
I used to live in Canada and I still have a lot of friends who live there. Their system has its pros, but also its share of cons. Liberals often point out that Canada spends 40% less on healthcare than the United States, but this lower spending has inevitably led to rationing of health services.
We can reduce the costs associated with health services/insurance via a combination of tort reform, entitlement reform, and loosening regulations/mandates to make insurance companies more competitive. If doctors can do their job without having to practice defensive medicine, that would be a great start.
One that comes to mind is that of Jonathan Simms, a teenager in Northern Ireland who contracted Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, more commonly known as mad cow disease. His parents had to fight the government for an experimental treatment that would potentially stop the disease from progressing. By the time they secured the treatment (which did stop the disease from spreading further), it was too late. The teenager entered a PVS and died a couple weeks ago.
I used to live in Canada and I still have a lot of friends who live there. Their system has its pros, but also its share of cons. Liberals often point out that Canada spends 40% less on healthcare than the United States, but this lower spending has inevitably led to rationing of health services.
We can reduce the costs associated with health services/insurance via a combination of tort reform, entitlement reform, and loosening regulations/mandates to make insurance companies more competitive. If doctors can do their job without having to practice defensive medicine, that would be a great start.
Bfgrn
New member
Then tell me WHAT can't the insurance companies cover? I'm sure Nataline Sarkisyan's parents would like to know.
In late 2007 a 17-year-old girl, Nataline Sarkisyan, lay close to death in a Los Angeles hospital. Diagnosed with leukemia at the age of 14, Sarkisyan was suffering from liver failure due to the aggressive treatment that had recently cured the disease. Without a new organ she would die; if she received a transplant, her doctors gave her a 60 percent chance of surviving.
Miraculously, a perfect liver match was found a couple of days after Sarkisyan was put on the transplant list. But her insurer, CIGNA, denied the request to cover the cost of the operation, deeming it “experimental.” Nataline’s desperate mother took the fight to the headquarters of the insurer, organizing protests and demonstrations. CIGNA, finding itself embroiled in a public relations nightmare, reversed its decision. But it was too late, and Sarkisyan died two hours after their change of heart.
Her case had a profound effect on CIGNA’s then Head of Corporate Communications, Wendell Potter. He was devastated upon hearing of Sarkisyan’s death, and it led to his gradual realization that he “was part of an industry that would do whatever it took to perpetuate its extraordinarily profitable existence. I had sold my soul.” He walked away from the company shortly thereafter, becoming a leading voice in the campaign for healthcare reform.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
I meant that I was right that you totally missed the whole issue. but thanks for playing anyway.
cawacko
Well-known member
Actually I think you will find many on the right agree that our system needs changing. As usual the differences appear when discussing what kind of changes need to be made.
Bfgrn
New member
Should Nataline Sarkisyan's claim have been denied?
BILL MOYERS: You told Congress that the industry has hijacked our health care system and turned it into a giant ATM for Wall Street. You said, "I saw how they confuse their customers and dump the sick, all so they can satisfy their Wall Street investors." How do they satisfy their Wall Street investors?
WENDELL POTTER: Well, there's a measure of profitability that investors look to, and it's called a medical loss ratio. And it's unique to the health insurance industry. And by medical loss ratio, I mean that it's a measure that tells investors or anyone else how much of a premium dollar is used by the insurance company to actually pay medical claims. And that has been shrinking, over the years, since the industry's been dominated by, or become dominated by for-profit insurance companies. Back in the early '90s, or back during the time that the Clinton plan was being debated, 95 cents out of every dollar was sent, you know, on average was used by the insurance companies to pay claims. Last year, it was down to just slightly above 80 percent.
So, investors want that to keep shrinking. And if they see that an insurance company has not done what they think meets their expectations with the medical loss ratio, they'll punish them. Investors will start leaving in droves.
I've seen a company stock price fall 20 percent in a single day, when it did not meet Wall Street's expectations with this medical loss ratio.
BILL MOYERS: And they do what to make sure that they keep diminishing the medical loss ratio?
WENDELL POTTER: Rescission is one thing. Denying claims is another. Being, you know, really careful as they review claims, particularly for things like liver transplants, to make sure, from their point of view, that it really is medically necessary and not experimental. That's one thing. And that was that issue in the Nataline Sarkisyan case.
But another way is to purge employer accounts, that-- if a small business has an employee, for example, who suddenly has have a lot of treatment, or is in an accident. And medical bills are piling up, and this employee is filing claims with the insurance company. That'll be noticed by the insurance company.
And when that business is up for renewal, and it typically is up, once a year, up for renewal, the underwriters will look at that. And they'll say, "We need to jack up the rates here, because the experience was," when I say experience, the claim experience, the number of claims filed was more than we anticipated. So we need to jack up the price. Jack up the premiums. Often they'll do this, knowing that the employer will have no alternative but to leave. And that happens all the time.
BILL MOYERS: So, the more of my premium that goes to my health claims, pays for my medical coverage, the less money the company makes.
WENDELL POTTER: That's right. Exactly right.
BILL MOYERS: So they want to reverse that. They don't want my premium to go for my health care, right?
WENDELL POTTER: Exactly right. They--
BILL MOYERS: Where does it go?
WENDELL POTTER: Well, a big chunk of it goes into shareholders' pockets. It's returned to them as part of the investment to them. It goes into the exorbitant salaries that a lot of the executives make. It goes into paying sales, marketing, and underwriting expenses. So a lot of it goes to pay those kinds of administrative functions. Overhead.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
blind liberal morons. why can't you see the big picture?
Rationalist
Hail Voltaire
The problem with the theory that insurance companies make obscene profits is that it's simply not true. The typical profit margin for an insurance company is 2 - 3%, about the same as a grocery store.
Why is it that liberals use the concept that "everyone has to have auto insurance" (really only people who want to drive a car do) And yet resist the concept of making health insurance as competitive and selective as auto insurance is? For instance I can buy auto insurance in SC; I can add extra coverage that meet my needs or not add it- Imagine if we could buy health coverage that way? I no longer need obstetrics coverage- a young person may not want coverage for mamograms or coverage for knee and hip replacement.
Last edited:
apple0154
MEOW
Because not everyone has a car but everyone has a body. (And some people have an especially nice body but I won't get into that.)
Also, like car or home owner insurance one can determine any possible loss. For example, if one purchases home insurance against fire but not theft they know ahead of time the maximum loss they may sustain, that being the contents of their home. Also, they can evaluate the chances of theft, say, between living in a gated community with security patrols vs a crime ridden area. Contrast that to medical insurance.
How is one able to make a reasonable evaluation regarding the risk of illness or accident? Cancer? Organ failure? Paralysis?
Rationalist
Hail Voltaire
Rationalist
Hail Voltaire
What about making total thanks/groans visible above the user's post? It's not a big deal, just wondering..
Rationalist
Hail Voltaire
I know the feeling. I used to run a vBulletin and phpBB board and mod problems were very annoying and difficult to troubleshoot, especially since I didn't know any code at the time.
Bfgrn
New member
Does Medicare work? I am not talking about the cost, I'm talking about the patient care?