Health Insurance Co-Ops

norm

Under a proposal by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., consumer-owned nonprofit cooperatives would sell insurance in competition with private industry, not unlike the way electric and agriculture co-ops operate, especially in rural states such as his own.

With $3 billion to $4 billion in initial support from the government, the co-ops would operate under a national structure with state affiliates, but independent of the government. They would be required to maintain the type of financial reserves that private companies are required to keep in case of unexpectedly high claims.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090816/ap_ ... e_overhaul


i'm interested to hear peoples thoughts

know1

Sounds good to me on the surface.

blondieblue227

Would that be another option to the public option that people are so upset about?

Explain to me why people are so upset about public option. Yes, it’s government but it won’t be the only choice. Wouldn’t public option be good to have in the mix to keep insurance companies in check?

Sludge Factory

blondieblue227 wrote:

Would that be another option to the public option that people are so upset about?

Explain to me why people are so upset about public option. Yes, it’s government but it won’t be the only choice. Wouldn’t public option be good to have in the mix to keep insurance companies in check?

I think a lot of people are upset with the public option because public options in the past have destroyed the private options.

I was talking with my brother about this and he mentioned that someone in this administration stated that the public option was sort of an entry phase with the ultimate goal to break up the private industry and thier profiteering on people's health in order to pave the way for universal health care.

I don't know if that is true or not, but thought I'd just chime in with that to see if someone else has heard something similar.

Pepe Silvia

Sludge Factory wrote:

blondieblue227 wrote:

Would that be another option to the public option that people are so upset about?

Explain to me why people are so upset about public option. Yes, it’s government but it won’t be the only choice. Wouldn’t public option be good to have in the mix to keep insurance companies in check?

I think a lot of people are upset with the public option because public options in the past have destroyed the private options.

I was talking with my brother about this and he mentioned that someone in this administration stated that the public option was sort of an entry phase with the ultimate goal to break up the private industry and thier profiteering on people's health in order to pave the way for universal health care.

I don't know if that is true or not, but thought I'd just chime in with that to see if someone else has heard something similar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z144CnlNyrk

Pepe Silvia

I heart Scout Niblett wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

blondieblue227 wrote:

Would that be another option to the public option that people are so upset about?

Explain to me why people are so upset about public option. Yes, it’s government but it won’t be the only choice. Wouldn’t public option be good to have in the mix to keep insurance companies in check?

I think a lot of people are upset with the public option because public options in the past have destroyed the private options.

I was talking with my brother about this and he mentioned that someone in this administration stated that the public option was sort of an entry phase with the ultimate goal to break up the private industry and thier profiteering on people's health in order to pave the way for universal health care.

I don't know if that is true or not, but thought I'd just chime in with that to see if someone else has heard something similar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z144CnlNyrk

although, they say here they will still push for a public option

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090818/ap_ ... e_overhaul

blondieblue227

Sludge Factory wrote:

I think a lot of people are upset with the public option because public options in the past have destroyed the private options.

oh they have? i didn't know that.

Sludge Factory

blondieblue227 wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

I think a lot of people are upset with the public option because public options in the past have destroyed the private options.

oh they have? i didn't know that.

That's what they are claiming did away with private letter carriers anyway. Don't know how substantiated that claim is, but I do believe Wells Fargo used to be in the postal business until it was made illegal and all letters had to be through the USPS.

blondieblue227

interesting. thanks for posting that.

see how i'm learning.....lol! i hope all dig into the facts.

blondieblue227

McCain said co-ops are a backdoor to government run healthcare.

Ok so if the public option was cheaper and people started to go with that, wouldn’t it make the insurance co regulate themselves to do competition with public option?

UPS and DSL are in competition with the US postal service. They’re still around.

Sludge Factory

blondieblue227 wrote:

McCain said co-ops are a backdoor to government run healthcare.

Ok so if the public option was cheaper and people started to go with that, wouldn’t it make the insurance co regulate themselves to do competition with public option?

UPS and DSL are in competition with the US postal service. They’re still around.

You are somewhat correct about UPS, DSL, and Fed Ex, but the only reason they are still allowed around is due to a loop hole. Those companies deliver "packages" but are prevented from delivering "mail" since the USPS is the only service that can deliver mail. I think the term is "mail" anyway...I'm not too sure. It might be "letters" or "parcels" or something like that.

blondieblue227

oh interesting.
thanks for posting.

Gern Blansten

Sludge Factory wrote:

blondieblue227 wrote:

McCain said co-ops are a backdoor to government run healthcare.

Ok so if the public option was cheaper and people started to go with that, wouldn’t it make the insurance co regulate themselves to do competition with public option?

UPS and DSL are in competition with the US postal service. They’re still around.

You are somewhat correct about UPS, DSL, and Fed Ex, but the only reason they are still allowed around is due to a loop hole. Those companies deliver "packages" but are prevented from delivering "mail" since the USPS is the only service that can deliver mail. I think the term is "mail" anyway...I'm not too sure. It might be "letters" or "parcels" or something like that.

not true....I can send anything I want through FedEx, DSL, UPS, etc.

fact is that the USPS charges $.44 for a letter so why would I pay FedEx $13 to deliver it?

blondieblue227

ahhh, good point. I didn’t take my thought one step further. FEDEX etc are more expensive than USPS. They are. I learned that when I started doing ebay. So in this case these companies to stay in competition with the government didn’t lower their cost to stay in business. It didn’t matter. That’s a score for the public option don’t you think?

Sludge Factory

Gern Blansten wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

blondieblue227 wrote:

McCain said co-ops are a backdoor to government run healthcare.

Ok so if the public option was cheaper and people started to go with that, wouldn’t it make the insurance co regulate themselves to do competition with public option?

UPS and DSL are in competition with the US postal service. They’re still around.

You are somewhat correct about UPS, DSL, and Fed Ex, but the only reason they are still allowed around is due to a loop hole. Those companies deliver "packages" but are prevented from delivering "mail" since the USPS is the only service that can deliver mail. I think the term is "mail" anyway...I'm not too sure. It might be "letters" or "parcels" or something like that.

not true....I can send anything I want through FedEx, DSL, UPS, etc.

fact is that the USPS charges $.44 for a letter so why would I pay FedEx $13 to deliver it?

Yeah, you might be able to send anything you want through them...but like I said it's the way they label what they are sending. They still call it parcels and not mail. If I am wrong in that I would like you to show me so I'm not spreading false info here.

Gern Blansten

I'm not clear on why it matters.

If you want to use fedex they don't question you on whether it is parcel or mail. You just put the motherfucker in a fedex envelope and "mail" the motherfucker

Sludge Factory

Gern Blansten wrote:

I'm not clear on why it matters.

If you want to use fedex they don't question you on whether it is parcel or mail. You just put the motherfucker in a fedex envelope and "mail" the motherfucker

It matters to me because I don't want to be seen as spreading false information. If something I am saying is incorrect I would like to be corrected so I can stop it.

I mean, if what I am saying is indeed true, I wonder what would happen if fed ex et. al. started offering cheaper prices than USPS for just mail transmittal and if the majority of mailings started going through fed ex, if the government would start paying closer attention to make sure that all they are delivering is packages?

I guess either way it might not matter too much since the internet is probably the reason that a good amount of USPS profits were cut into and ultimately that will probably be what kills it in the end...