Health Insurance

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

But there are plenty of stories to the contrary.

Not all insurance is the same. Aetna HMO is very well regarded by medical professionals. United Healthcare is seen as very interfering and as a bad business partner.

[c_and_a 0]

But there are plenty of stories to the contrary.

Not all insurance is the same. Aetna HMO is very well regarded by medical professionals. United Healthcare is seen as very interfering and as a bad business partner.

I understand that.

I am far from an expert on health care policy. It is really on the back of my mind.

I would guess it all boils down to people not being good consumers and picking bad plans or not updating their plan as they get older and are at higher risk for medical complications.

[Big Papa Zone 93]

Depending on an HMO to actually take care of you is like working in a retail store forever- they are motivated by profit and are not going to take care of you no matter how much hard work or money you bring to them.

If anyone can be bothered, I'd like a quick comparison on the pros/cons of PPO v HMO, please. Thanks.

there are people who make 100,000 dollars a year or so that end up with 50,000 in medical fees

See, I don't get this. I mean, I know you have a deductible, but how do you get lumbered with a bill like that if you have insurance? Provided you've not tried to claim for a pre-existing condition you had before the policy took effect, I mean?

[Ban Hammer 13,337]

damian, join the military, get free health care.

I would consider that, Chuck (seriously) if I wasn't 38-years-old. I'd never make it through basic training, mate.

you might surprise yourself. and they are taking 38 year olds.

[Big Papa Zone 93]

damian, join the military, get free health care.

I would consider that, Chuck (seriously) if I wasn't 38-years-old. I'd never make it through basic training, mate.

you might surprise yourself. and they are taking 38 year olds.

OK, what are my chances of a desk job? Or catering? Or something that doesn't involve front line fighting?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

damian, join the military, get free health care.

Charles, who do you think pays for that health care? The guvmint. I guess they can do some things right, eh?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

damian, join the military, get free health care.

Charles, who do you think pays for that health care? The guvmint. I guess they can do some things right, eh?

The idea is that when you join the military, you serve the nation and therefore earn those benefits. On the other hand, if you work as teacher or civil servant, you don't do any actual work are just a leach on society and therefore do not deserve those benefits.

I believe that's the idea. I don't agree with it, but there it is.

[sjquin 0]

It's not free. You pay for it through taxation. One way or another, you end up paying.

As for health insurance, you need to read over the details of your plan. You've said that in Australia they swipe a card and tell you if you're covered or not, right? Same basic principle here, only no card. In fact, health insurance gives you a much better idea of what's covered and what you'll need to pay since it's written out for you. Whether or not you choose to read it is your deal.

Who is going to read 500 pages of policy to see what is or is not covered? It's the same ####### with auto insurance here. You have 100 different options to choose from. Whereas my auto insurance in AUS has one option which provides $20 million worth of liability for anything auto related issue.

So basically health insurance is scam here. I paid 1.5% of my salary to the government and I was covered for everything in Aus, period. Plus my fellow citizens received quite a decent quality of care rather than be left to die on the streets. I haven't had to use a doctor or anything like that here but can now see why people are complaining. It's not the doctors fault. The insurance companies can get away with anything. They get to make their own rules.

The health insurance there is just an add-on to receive even better and faster coverage. We are paying close to $5.5K a year here and still have about 1,001 clauses, policy limits, conditions bla bla bla. That is on top of what the employers are paying.

U.S. health care system SUCKS!!! It's this thing called HMO (Health Maintenance Organization) It's a lucrative business. Only the HMO companies(ie. Kaiser, HeatlthNet, Aetna, Humana, and so on..profits on the expense of the people..

Here in the US if you don't have insurance you're screwed....if you do you have pay for expensive monthly insurance premiums(only a few company fully pays for their employees premiums because it's getting very expensive, especially todays economy) fu%K the HMO....Their main objective is to make money, they don't care about the welfare of the people, It's a wicked organization.....read more about it and research for yourself....

[one...two...tree 2,762]

U.S. health care system SUCKS!!! It's this thing called HMO (Health Maintenance Organization) It's a lucrative business. Only the HMO companies(ie. Kaiser, HeatlthNet, Aetna, Humana, and so on..profits on the expense of the people..

Here in the US if you don't have insurance you're screwed....if you do you have pay for expensive monthly insurance premiums(only a few company fully pays for their employees premiums because it's getting very expensive, especially todays economy) fu%K the HMO....Their main objective is to make money, they don't care about the welfare of the people, It's a wicked organization.....read more about it and research for yourself....

Kaiser is the largest not-for-profit HMO in the country.

[Ban Hammer 13,337]

damian, join the military, get free health care.

I would consider that, Chuck (seriously) if I wasn't 38-years-old. I'd never make it through basic training, mate.

you might surprise yourself. and they are taking 38 year olds.

OK, what are my chances of a desk job? Or catering? Or something that doesn't involve front line fighting?

it all depends on what job skill you sign up for.

damian, join the military, get free health care.

Charles, who do you think pays for that health care? The guvmint. I guess they can do some things right, eh?

not really - you've never been under tricare, have you? and right now there is talk again of boosting the premium by 4 times.

damian, join the military, get free health care.

Charles, who do you think pays for that health care? The guvmint. I guess they can do some things right, eh?

The idea is that when you join the military, you serve the nation and therefore earn those benefits. On the other hand, if you work as teacher or civil servant, you don't do any actual work are just a leach on society and therefore do not deserve those benefits.

I believe that's the idea. I don't agree with it, but there it is.

or just maybe, it's a recruitment and retention tool. with national health care, how's the military gonna meet quotas to remain a viable military force?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

or just maybe, it's a recruitment and retention tool. with national health care, how's the military gonna meet quotas to remain a viable military force?

A few years of service to the nation, either military or civilian, should be mandatory anyway. And maybe, just maybe, the military wouldn't have trouble recruiting if there wasn't the fact-based perception out there that our civilian leaders send them into war based on lies and deception.

[rebeccajo 14]

Except you aren't going to be paying in any more stamps, Damien.

You are correct, Rebbeca, I won't be. But it won't make a damn bit of difference. Why? Because as I've already stated, I have my NHS treatment entitlement card. And as I've also already stated, I'm still registered with my GP in Birmingham.

So what happenes if I'm unfortunate enough to get ill with something that for whatever reason my insurance here in the U.S doesn't cover? Very simple. I get on a plane to Birmingham, make an appointment with my GP (with whom I'm still registered, and will not check up on my NI, or "stamp" contributions, because the surgery already did that when I registered, and issued me with my "this guy qualifies for NHS treatment" card based upon their findings) and have him refer me to the relevant hospital/specialist. Sorted.

Yes, it is a problem.

No, it isn't. B)

I'm sure you'll let us know how that goes the first time you give it a go.

[mrsjohnsonscat 7]

But there are plenty of stories to the contrary.

Not all insurance is the same. Aetna HMO is very well regarded by medical professionals. United Healthcare is seen as very interfering and as a bad business partner.

I understand that.

I am far from an expert on health care policy. It is really on the back of my mind.

I would guess it all boils down to people not being good consumers and picking bad plans or not updating their plan as they get older and are at higher risk for medical complications.

People's insurance is usually tied to their employer. The employer decides what policy to use, which is usually to the benefit of the bottom line of the company and not the employee. This isn't a matter of not being good consumers, picking bad plans or not updating their plans. The employee is not in charge of this decision.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

But there are plenty of stories to the contrary.

Not all insurance is the same. Aetna HMO is very well regarded by medical professionals. United Healthcare is seen as very interfering and as a bad business partner.

I understand that.

I am far from an expert on health care policy. It is really on the back of my mind.

I would guess it all boils down to people not being good consumers and picking bad plans or not updating their plan as they get older and are at higher risk for medical complications.

People's insurance is usually tied to their employer. The employer decides what policy to use, which is usually to the benefit of the bottom line of the company and not the employee. This isn't a matter of not being good consumers, picking bad plans or not updating their plans. The employee is not in charge of this decision.

Very good point.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

May 4, 2009

A Cure Worse Than The Disease

by Edwin J. Feulner, Ph.D.

Emily Morley got some very bad news in March 2006. Her cancer had spread, the doctor informed the 67-year-old Canadian. She would need to see an oncologist.

Then Morley got some really bad news: She'd have to wait several months before she could get an appointment.

Only after her family raised a ruckus, calling the local paper and starting a petition to demand she get care, did the government get her a specialist. Then, it was more bad news: Morley had only three months to live.

At least she had time to put her affairs in order. "Had her family not intervened," noted provincial lawmaker Don McMorris, "it is quite likely that Emily Morley may have died before even seeing an oncologist for the first time."

But that's how a single-payer, or "universal," health care system works (so to speak). Even the very ill routinely hurry up and wait.

Alarmingly, Congress is gearing up to "reform" American health care along Canadian lines -- and proponents are trying to take a short-cut to get there. According to former Medicaid director Dennis Smith, proponents of a government-run health system are hoping to enact a bill by by-passing the usual, lengthy bipartisan review process.

The goal of any reform, supposedly, would be to trigger "competition" between government-run health care and currently existing private health insurance plans. Yet, Smith warns, the government will inevitably tilt the playing field to favor its own plan, running private coverage out of business. Americans could be left with a single, government-run health plan à la Canada's.

So let's take a look at what such a system means for our northern neighbors.

As Sally Pipes, president of the Pacific Research Institute and a former Canadian citizen, recently told Congress, today some 750,000 Canadians are on a wait-list for medical procedures. Further, 3.2 million (out of a population of 32 million) are waiting for a chance to see their primary-care physician. Once a PCP diagnoses a problem, Canadians must keep on waiting -- 17.3 weeks on average -- before they can see a specialist.

Why? "The Canadian government controls costs by rationing care," Pipes explained. "Canada ranks 14th out of 25 [Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development] countries in MRI machines, and 19th out of 26 countries in CT scanners." Long wait times and lack of equipment force many to seek care in the United States.

Take Member of Parliament Belinda Stronach. She strongly supports Canada's health care system. But where did she go when she was diagnosed with cancer in 2007? To California, where she paid for treatment out-of-pocket. Then there was a mother in Calgary, Alberta, who had to be flown to Great Falls, Mont., to deliver her quadruplets. This relatively small American city had better facilities than any hospital in the wealthy province of Alberta.

Our current system is far from perfect, of course. Millions of Americans lack health insurance, prompting many to put off seeing a doctor until a small, treatable problem has become a larger, more threatening condition.

But the answer isn't to try and cover everyone through a single-payer system. We'd be better off changing how the federal tax code treats health insurance (which, illogically enough in our 21st century economy, ties it to our jobs). Such a change would foster genuine competition among insurers by allowing Americans to shop for the coverage that suits them best in an open market.

Current policy provides unlimited tax breaks for health coverage provided through employers. Meanwhile, Americans who want to buy their own insurance must do so with after-tax dollars. Few can afford to do that, especially since insurers are more interested in competing for big group coverage (more lives, more money) rather than individual or family-based coverage.

Lawmakers could change this, and even provide vouchers or other forms of direct assistance to help poorer Americans buy private plans they would own and control. This would also make insurance portable when people change jobs.

Maintaining our standard of care is critical. There's a reason Canadians "fly south" for treatment: Our system, for all its flaws, provides superior quality and access to care. Let's ensure that policymakers, in their understandable zeal to reform health care, don't make changes that weaken the entire system.

Ed Feulner is president of The Heritage Foundation.