HealthCARE does not equal Health INSURANCE

know1 · July 2009

decides2dream wrote:

know1 wrote:

Here's another thing to think about.

If you think about the concept of health insurance:

We - people who need healthcare

are paying for someone else - the health insurance company

to pay someone else - our health care provider

for our health care.

So why do we need to pay someone else to pay for something for us? It makes no sense.

Plus the insurance company is making a profit so we're probably overall paying them MORE than we would if we would just pay for it ourselves.

absolute agreement.
thus why the system of health insurance, that leads to our healthcare....needs to disappear.....

Right, but I view the government taking over the role of the insurance provider to be more of the same...or even worse of the same.

Now we would be paying someone else - the government through taxes - to pay someone else for our healthcare. AND...we'd have to abide by the government's rules.

decides2dream · July 2009

know1 wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

know1 wrote:

Here's another thing to think about.

If you think about the concept of health insurance:

We - people who need healthcare

are paying for someone else - the health insurance company

to pay someone else - our health care provider

for our health care.

So why do we need to pay someone else to pay for something for us? It makes no sense.

Plus the insurance company is making a profit so we're probably overall paying them MORE than we would if we would just pay for it ourselves.

absolute agreement.
thus why the system of health insurance, that leads to our healthcare....needs to disappear.....

Right, but I view the government taking over the role of the insurance provider to be more of the same...or even worse of the same.

Now we would be paying someone else - the government through taxes - to pay someone else for our healthcare. AND...we'd have to abide by the government's rules.

so basically you just want everyone to pay all their meidcal expenses out of pocket, period? i just want to be sure i am understanding you correctly.

i did already know that while we agree on many points, that you most definitely are not a supporter of any UHC plan. however, it is not one and the same to what we have now. firstly, and quite importantly, the for profit portion of our current system....gone. also, while the government would pay for our care through our taxes.....we still are left with much choice in who and where we go for care. absolutely, we would have to abide by their rules, usually the case. hey, if you think you can afford say cancer treatments all on your own, more power to ya! hell, even simply routine care, quite pricey! while it was totally covered by my insurance, my most current, preventative care, was over 2k. and sure, i pay that and more in yearly premiums....but add some prescriptions, or long-term care needs, an accident, an ER visit....and it quickly escalates beyond the reach of most people. so yes, i am all for what will get the most healthcare to all people, for life. there are always concessions/compromises to made. i accept that.

jlew24asu · July 2009

know1 wrote:

Yes

(with the possible exception of some form of catastrophic insurance which covers major illnesses, surgeries, accidents, etc. You know.....like car insurance does. Imagine what car insurance would cost if it paid for gas and wiper fluid)

There are more reasons for this than just financial. Like I said, it brings it back to the patient being the true client for the doctor and it offers a lot more freedom for all of us over our medical options.

well ok, I see where you're going. but even small procedures can run into the thousands.

_ · July 2009

norm wrote:

scb wrote:

norm wrote:

just wanted to point out that is not true...you can get health care if you pay for it...and most doctors give a discount (anywhere from 5 to 20%) off the cost they would charge to the insurance cos

but i agree with all you said though

I just want to point out that self-pay patients still end up paying more for the same services than insurance companies do. That doesn't seem fair to me.

i didn't say it was fair and fully aware of what i have to pay

I didn't say you said it was fair.

norm · July 2009

scb wrote:

norm wrote:

scb wrote:

I just want to point out that self-pay patients still end up paying more for the same services than insurance companies do. That doesn't seem fair to me.

i didn't say it was fair and fully aware of what i have to pay

I didn't say you said it was fair.

i know

decides2dream · July 2009

know1 wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

know1 wrote:

Here's another thing to think about.

If you think about the concept of health insurance:

We - people who need healthcare

are paying for someone else - the health insurance company

to pay someone else - our health care provider

for our health care.

So why do we need to pay someone else to pay for something for us? It makes no sense.

Plus the insurance company is making a profit so we're probably overall paying them MORE than we would if we would just pay for it ourselves.

I'm not saying you aren't making logical points but what are you suggesting? eliminate the insurance company and just pay the doctors/hospitals directly?

Yes

(with the possible exception of some form of catastrophic insurance which covers major illnesses, surgeries, accidents, etc. You know.....like car insurance does. Imagine what car insurance would cost if it paid for gas and wiper fluid)

There are more reasons for this than just financial. Like I said, it brings it back to the patient being the true client for the doctor and it offers a lot more freedom for all of us over our medical options.

how so?
we still would have insurance for accidents, major illnesses/treatments, etc....so still would be dictating what would be covered and so on. you want to treat every citizen's healthcare like that of a car? while i 'get' the analogy, even basic preventative care....can cost thousands. so you still would leave many, many people with tough choices. well-baby check-ups, or pay the gas bill, buy groceries, get a mammogram annually....or maybe skip a year b/c $$$ is a little tighter or whatever, etc.

preventative care is the best way, the most cost-effective way, of preventing/treating illness. sadly, many people can't afford that basic care now, or perhaps would not get ALL the basic care they really should, due to cost.

know1 · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

know1 wrote:

Yes

(with the possible exception of some form of catastrophic insurance which covers major illnesses, surgeries, accidents, etc. You know.....like car insurance does. Imagine what car insurance would cost if it paid for gas and wiper fluid)

There are more reasons for this than just financial. Like I said, it brings it back to the patient being the true client for the doctor and it offers a lot more freedom for all of us over our medical options.

well ok, I see where you're going. but even small procedures can run into the thousands.

They run into the thousands now BECAUSE of health insurance and the fact that it inflates health care costs in it's own interest of self-preservation and to make health insurance seem like a necessity.

Again, we are all already paying for every penny of our own health care PLUS the profits and operating costs of the health insurance industry. It just doesn't seem like it because our employers are paying for our insurance. But where does that money come from and if they didn't have to pay insurance how much lower would the cost of the goods they sell and how much more could they afford to pay us in salaries? Don't they just raise their prices and not give us as big of raises to offset the money they have to pay for health insurance?

It just shocks me sometimes that people can be so naive to think that everyone of us is NOT already paying for every bit of our own health care plus supporting the health insurance industry which skims off their take and then just pays our bills for us.

know1 · July 2009

decides2dream wrote:

how so?
we still would have insurance for accidents, major illnesses/treatments, etc....so still would be dictating what would be covered and so on. you want to treat every citizen's healthcare like that of a car? while i 'get' the analogy, even basic preventative care....can cost thousands. so you still would leave many, many people with tough choices. well-baby check-ups, or pay the gas bill, buy groceries, get a mammogram annually....or maybe skip a year b/c $$$ is a little tighter or whatever, etc.

preventative care is the best way, the most cost-effective way, of preventing/treating illness. sadly, many people can't afford that basic care now, or perhaps would not get ALL the basic care they really should, due to cost.

The costs are all artificially high right now because of health insurance.

Furthermore, we'd all have a lot more money available if we didn't have to pay someone else to pay for our care.

Do you go to the grocery store yourself, or do you hire someone to go do it for you? Which makes more sense?

jlew24asu · July 2009

know1 wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

know1 wrote:

Yes

(with the possible exception of some form of catastrophic insurance which covers major illnesses, surgeries, accidents, etc. You know.....like car insurance does. Imagine what car insurance would cost if it paid for gas and wiper fluid)

There are more reasons for this than just financial. Like I said, it brings it back to the patient being the true client for the doctor and it offers a lot more freedom for all of us over our medical options.

well ok, I see where you're going. but even small procedures can run into the thousands.

They run into the thousands now BECAUSE of health insurance and the fact that it inflates health care costs in it's own interest of self-preservation and to make health insurance seem like a necessity.

Again, we are all already paying for every penny of our own health care PLUS the profits and operating costs of the health insurance industry. It just doesn't seem like it because our employers are paying for our insurance. But where does that money come from and if they didn't have to pay insurance how much lower would the cost of the goods they sell and how much more could they afford to pay us in salaries? Don't they just raise their prices and not give us as big of raises to offset the money they have to pay for health insurance?

It just shocks me sometimes that people can be so naive to think that everyone of us is NOT already paying for every bit of our own health care plus supporting the health insurance industry which skims off their take and then just pays our bills for us.

the cost of high quality care is still expensive with or without the insurance industry. where do you draw the line between catastrophic event or "small check up"? you also mentioned the insurance industry is necessary to cover these catastrophic events....are they allowed to be profitable? if not, what is the point of them being in business.

lets try this without the name calling. I realize i'm just some idiot naive guy. I'm here to learn

know1 · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

lets try this without the name calling. I realize i'm just some idiot naive guy. I'm here to learn

The cost is high because the insurance industry sets it high.

I didn't call you any names. If I called you a name I would have said "jlew is naive". Don't have such thin skin or be so ready to be offended.

jlew24asu · July 2009

know1 wrote:

The cost is high because the insurance industry sets it high.

the insurance industry doesn't set the price of healthcare, they set the price of premiums. without insurance, doctors will still charge for their services and the cost is still going to be high.

know1 wrote:

I didn't call you any names. If I called you a name I would have said "jlew is naive". Don't have such thin skin or be so ready to be offended.

I'm fine thanks, but I'm getting a little tired of all the fucking experts around here. and anyone who doesnt agree is just naive or stupid.

know1 · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

know1 wrote:

The cost is high because the insurance industry sets it high.

the insurance industry doesn't set the price of healthcare, they set the price of premiums. without insurance, doctors will still charge for their services and the cost is still going to be high.

I'm not an expert, but I think the insurance industry does indeed tell the health care providers what they will pay for procedures.

Furthermore, how do health care providers determine what they will charge? Usually that's determined by what their customers are willing to pay. Who are the customers of the doctors? The answer to that is the insurance providers.

Do you think doctors would sit around and not have any business if nobody was willing to pay their prices?

decides2dream · July 2009

know1 wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

how so?
we still would have insurance for accidents, major illnesses/treatments, etc....so still would be dictating what would be covered and so on. you want to treat every citizen's healthcare like that of a car? while i 'get' the analogy, even basic preventative care....can cost thousands. so you still would leave many, many people with tough choices. well-baby check-ups, or pay the gas bill, buy groceries, get a mammogram annually....or maybe skip a year b/c $$$ is a little tighter or whatever, etc.

preventative care is the best way, the most cost-effective way, of preventing/treating illness. sadly, many people can't afford that basic care now, or perhaps would not get ALL the basic care they really should, due to cost.

The costs are all artificially high right now because of health insurance.

Furthermore, we'd all have a lot more money available if we didn't have to pay someone else to pay for our care.

Do you go to the grocery store yourself, or do you hire someone to go do it for you? Which makes more sense?

first your saying the insurance industry dictates what they will pay....now you are saying the prices are artifically high....so which is it? i do believe you are correct, insurance companies dictate what they will pay, and it;s usually reduced fee, to the clinics/doctors.

we would have a lot more money if no one PROFITTED from our healthcare, there's the area i see for a lot of cost savings.

and actually, bad analogy, b/c grocery shopping and delivery is on the rise....amyn people do it, for the convenience, because they can't do it themselves, etc. what makes more sense...is whatever works best for you. in the healthcare scenario, i think looking at the big picture...it's considering what works best for ALL....and that all have equal access to utilize.

preventative care is the most cost effective means of healthcare.....so it makes a lot of sense to fund it.

Gern Blansten · July 2009

There is so much wasted in our current system.

In Indianapolis (and I'm sure lots of other places) it drives me crazy to see TV commercials and billboards advertising hospitals....I mean come on...If I get hit by a truck I want to go to the nearest hospital...I'm not going to demand to be taken 20 miles away because of a nice ad on TV

Sooooo much money being wasted....and the hospitals here compete to see who can build the biggest and most beautiful hospitals...they look like Taj Mahal's

Imagine the cost difference of putting up a simple brick building versus the glass and iron monstrocities they put up everywhere....it's sad

soulsinging · July 2009

decides2dream wrote:

know1 wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

how so?
we still would have insurance for accidents, major illnesses/treatments, etc....so still would be dictating what would be covered and so on. you want to treat every citizen's healthcare like that of a car? while i 'get' the analogy, even basic preventative care....can cost thousands. so you still would leave many, many people with tough choices. well-baby check-ups, or pay the gas bill, buy groceries, get a mammogram annually....or maybe skip a year b/c $$$ is a little tighter or whatever, etc.

preventative care is the best way, the most cost-effective way, of preventing/treating illness. sadly, many people can't afford that basic care now, or perhaps would not get ALL the basic care they really should, due to cost.

The costs are all artificially high right now because of health insurance.

Furthermore, we'd all have a lot more money available if we didn't have to pay someone else to pay for our care.

Do you go to the grocery store yourself, or do you hire someone to go do it for you? Which makes more sense?

first your saying the insurance industry dictates what they will pay....now you are saying the prices are artifically high....so which is it?

It doesn't have to be one or the other. He's right, it's both. Costs are artificially high because that is what the health insurance companies say they must be, in order to protect profits.

_ · July 2009

know1 wrote:

Furthermore, we'd all have a lot more money available if we didn't have to pay someone else to pay for our care.

While I totally agree with this statement and with the idea that we should do away with the health insurance industry, I still think single-payer is the way to go. While we would still have to pay some overhead, the overhead would be about 1/10th of what it is for private insurance. And, more importantly, the government is not a for-profit industry.

soulsinging · July 2009

know1 wrote:

It just shocks me sometimes that people can be so naive to think that everyone of us is NOT already paying for every bit of our own health care plus supporting the health insurance industry which skims off their take and then just pays our bills for us.

A lot of times, they're not even doing that. Between high co-pays and maximum benefit caps, you're basically paying 3-4 times... once on your employer's payroll tax which cuts into your income, again on your premiums, again on your co-pay, and possibly again if you exceed your limit because you get really sick. And that's assuming you are lucky enough to get a disease they will cover you for, in which case you can end up paying for the tax and the premium and get absolutely NO coverage from them and still end up paying your bills entirely on your own.

Again, it begs the question... does ANY other business in the world operate like this?

VINNY GOOMBA · July 2009

scb wrote:

And, more importantly, the government is not a for-profit industry.

At 13 trillion dollars in debt, I couldn't agree more with this statement.

decides2dream · July 2009

soulsinging wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

know1 wrote:

The costs are all artificially high right now because of health insurance.

Furthermore, we'd all have a lot more money available if we didn't have to pay someone else to pay for our care.

Do you go to the grocery store yourself, or do you hire someone to go do it for you? Which makes more sense?

first your saying the insurance industry dictates what they will pay....now you are saying the prices are artifically high....so which is it?

It doesn't have to be one or the other. He's right, it's both. Costs are artificially high because that is what the health insurance companies say they must be, in order to protect profits.

aha....yes, know1 is right....forgot about that. even tho they dictate to the doctors what they will pay, the prices can still be inflated to cover that, thus making them even higher.

either way though, we'd still save MORE money be reducing the aritifically inflated costs AND doing away with profit entirely. obviously, sticking with his car insurance comparison....even car insurance carriers build in profit as well, b/c otherwise...how would they stay in business? so it still makes sense imo to do away with insurance as our only means of care, whether catastrophic care only, or our current system.

i don't think it was this thread, but one of the other many healthcare threads...that i personally think scb spelled out quite well while the while car insurance idea really isn't a good one.

_ · July 2009

jlew24asu wrote:

the cost of high quality care is still expensive with or without the insurance industry.

As much as 30% of the money we pay to private insurance is spent on overhead rather than direct care. For Medicare, that cost is 2-3%.

HealthCARE does not equal Health INSURANCE

Comments

Categories