Health care increasingly out of reach for millions of Americans

Leatherneck · May 10, 2012

Medicare and the VA system is an indication of what happens when the know-it-alls in D.C. get involved with health care and health insurance.

Leatherneck · May 10, 2012

The main source of the increase, which is no secret, is the requirement of Obamacare (already in affect) to extend coverage to pre-existing conditions AND cover "children" up to age 26. Children? 26?

Any time you MANDATE that kind of requirement onto a company in business to make a PROFIT (also not a secret) the results are entirely predictable. The expectation of anything else was never anything but unreasonable.

But here was the deal with Obamacare..."YOU (insurance companies) MUST provide this coverage, but WE (government) are going to FORCE everyone to buy your service and you will make more money" Then the insurance lobbyists went along with it and the government claimed to have "done something" for you. That is it in a nutshell, the rest is just smoke and mirrors.

Since the mandate to provide the coverage went into affect already, but the mandate to BUY the insurance does not go into affect for two more years...guess what? The ONLY thing surprising is that anyone thought anything else would happen. In what state has mandatory AUTO insurance reduced rates? uh-huh, you got that right. Forcing people to buy something will not make it cheaper.

It all falls apart in June when the Supreme Court rules.

IF there is going to be government health care, the ONLY way it will work is single payer.

Good points. The most likely way for health insurance to become more affordable is allow insurance companies to compete (competition works in all other areas) across state lines and stop the silly mandates imposed by states -- larger breast, a slimmer nose, having the fat sucked from one's @ss and the lap band procedure should not be mandated. Offered at an additional cost, yeah, but mandated -- no!

lostinblue · May 10, 2012

People and government refuse to be accountable.We have more overweight people than ever before in history.Just look at all the medical problems that are associated with this problem. Look at the government. The tobacco industry was sued because it had deep pockets.Where has that money gone.

Where Tobacco Settlement Funds Really Went

More Sharing ServicesShareShare on facebook_likeEmail Comment Print Single Page

Text Size- / +July 22

When the tobacco companies agreed to pay a $200 billion settlement to states for medical costs due to smoking, and to help prevent kids from starting, it was a legal victory against "Big Tobacco."

"We need to finish this job and move on with saving children's lives," Christine Gregoire, the Washington State Attorney General, said after the settlement was announced three years ago. "This is not about the money … We are getting this industry off the backs of our kids."

Gregoire was not alone in that declaration. At the time, attorneys general from around the nation vowed to use the funds to fight teen smoking. But once the settlement money landed in state coffers, that wasn't always the case. While some states have spent the money on programs to fight teen smoking, others went on a spending spree.

Today four major anti-smoking groups say states are squandering billions of dollars that was supposed to be used to keep children and teenagers away from cigarettes. Because of state budget shortfalls, states are cutting already under-funded tobacco prevention programs by $102.3 million, or 13 percent, according to a report issued today by the American Lung Association, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, and Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

The groups say that these budget reductions compound another problem: few states were keeping their promise to use tobacco settlement funds for tobacco prevention programs.

A Feeding Frenzy

In the state of New York, for example, Niagara County spent $700,000 in tobacco settlement funds for a sprinkler system at a public golf course. The county also spent $24 million for a county jail and office building.

In Wrangell, Alaska, $3.5 million of the tobacco settlement money was used to renovate shipping docks.

In Los Angeles, former Mayor Richard Riordan proposed using $100 million in tobacco money to defend cops who are accused of planting drugs and guns on suspects. He was turned down.

But these are just some examples of the feeding frenzy that has happened over the tobacco money. Now, anti-smoking groups are saying the public has been duped.

"The states' failure to use these funds to actually protect our children is unconscionable," said Matt Myers, executive vice president and general counsel of the National Center for Tobacco Free Kids, a Washington-based anti-tobacco lobbying group. States that have decided to divert those funds are already seeing increased smoking rates among children, he said.

N.C. Tobacco Farmers Benefit

North Carolina gave $200,000 in tobacco money to the Carolina Horse Park, an equestrian center near Pinehurst, N.C. The center defends the grant, saying it will boost economic development. But local taxpayer groups think the allocation was wasteful.

"It's pretty much people wear funny hats and drink and eat, [and] watch horses go around," said Don Carrington, a member of the John Locke Foundation, a nonprofit think tank based in Raleigh, N.C.

"It's amazing we would use the tobacco settlement to support an operation like that. It should not be publicly funded," Carrington said.

The strangest twist: Money that was pledged to keep kids from smoking even went to tobacco farmers.

North Carolina spent $42 million of the settlement funds to market tobacco and modernize the tobacco curing process.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=125919&page=1

How come there is not a "smokers hospital in every city. Could that settlement money have been used for a state of the art hospital to treat smokers in every large city. Obama care.....Big slush fund to keep the powerful in power.

Edited May 10, 2012 by lostinblue

Mr. Big Dog · May 10, 2012

The time period for the increase in our son's coverage is this year.

If we want to talk about anecdotes, my premiums went down this year. What gives?

mawilson · May 10, 2012

How do you propose that there be equitable care across the nation then? Or does that matter?

Free market will take care of it. Either people will move to states with better healthcare, or better healthcare will move to where people demand it.

Póg mo · May 10, 2012

Good points. The most likely way for health insurance to become more affordable is allow insurance companies to compete (competition works in all other areas) across state lines and stop the silly mandates imposed by states -- larger breast, a slimmer nose, having the fat sucked from one's @ss and the lap band procedure should not be mandated. Offered at an additional cost, yeah, but mandated -- no!

In theory yes, unfortunately most likely what would happen, would be we'd end up really large insurance companies with little interest in competing against similar insurance companies. Banks can operate all over the US, but this has not made banking any easier or less expensive for the majority of people. The only way forward as far as I can is a single payer system and give the government the power to negotiate with big health care companies without having its hands tied behind its back.

mawilson · May 10, 2012

The most likely way for health insurance to become more affordable is allow insurance companies to compete

The health insurance industry profit margin is only about 3-4%. Even if you eliminate insurance companies completely, health care costs will still rise.

As indeed they do in single-payer countries:

When the UK NHS was created in 1948, the government spent £10.7 billion in the first year of its operation (in 2010/11 prices, or 3.5% of GDP). By 2009/10, spending had increased more than tenfold in real terms to reach £122 billion, or 8.5% of GDP. Growth in health expenditure has far outpaced the rise in both GDP and total public expenditure: each increased by a factor of around 4.8 over this period.

xebec · May 10, 2012

In theory yes, unfortunately most likely what would happen, would be we'd end up really large insurance companies with little interest in competing against similar insurance companies. Banks can operate all over the US, but this has not made banking any easier or less expensive for the majority of people. The only way forward as far as I can is a single payer system and give the government the power to negotiate with big health care companies without having its hands tied behind its back.

I bank with a small bank. There is another in the town where I work, and yet another in the town where my ranch is located. That's three in a two county area. My brother works in one of the largest cities in the country, and banks at a small credit union. Banking is quite easy, and the "cost" of my banking hasn't changed significantly in years. Seems like, from where I stand, your comparison actually undermines your progressive instinct that tells you "single payer" big brother socialism is "the only way forward."

Edited May 10, 2012 by xebec

Póg mo · May 10, 2012

I bank with a small bank. There is another in the town where I work, and yet another in the town where my ranch is located. That's three in a two county area. My brother works in one of the largest cities in the country, and banks at a small credit union. Banking is quite easy, and the "cost" of my banking hasn't changed significantly in years. Seems like, from where I stand, your comparison actually undermines your progressive instinct that tells you "single payer" big brother socialism is "the only way forward."

Ya, try sending or receiving money overseas, or to somebody in another state without using paypal. My credit union charges $50 to receive money from overseas. My bank (Wells Fargo) also charges a fee to receive money from overseas. If I want to open a new account in another bank, I better make time in my schedule to spend at least an hour signing paperwork. In South Korea I could expect to spend maybe fifteen minutes opening an account. In most countries checks are thing of the past, in US certain businesses still insist on using them, even though the transaction is essentially the same as using an ATM card i.e. instant. The only difference is if you don't have enough money in your account you get to pay a returned check fee.

Póg mo · May 10, 2012

The health insurance industry profit margin is only about 3-4%. Even if you eliminate insurance companies completely, health care costs will still rise.

As indeed they do in single-payer countries:

When the UK NHS was created in 1948, the government spent £10.7 billion in the first year of its operation (in 2010/11 prices, or 3.5% of GDP). By 2009/10, spending had increased more than tenfold in real terms to reach £122 billion, or 8.5% of GDP. Growth in health expenditure has far outpaced the rise in both GDP and total public expenditure: each increased by a factor of around 4.8 over this period.

I think they're doing ok.

AHIP's focus on profit margins is misleading and designed to protect their massive income by shifting attention away from their return on equity -- a key measure of profits as a percentage of the amount invested. That return is a phenomenal 16.1% as of today. By that measure, health insurers are ranked fourth highest of the 16 industries in the health care sector. They also deliver a higher return for investors than cellphone companies, beer companies, mortgage companies, life insurance companies, TV broadcasters, drug store companies or grocery stores.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ethan-rome/the-truth-about-health-in_b_863632.html

Póg mo · May 10, 2012

The health insurance industry profit margin is only about 3-4%. Even if you eliminate insurance companies completely, health care costs will still rise.

As indeed they do in single-payer countries:

When the UK NHS was created in 1948, the government spent £10.7 billion in the first year of its operation (in 2010/11 prices, or 3.5% of GDP). By 2009/10, spending had increased more than tenfold in real terms to reach £122 billion, or 8.5% of GDP. Growth in health expenditure has far outpaced the rise in both GDP and total public expenditure: each increased by a factor of around 4.8 over this period.

Health care expenditure is still low in the UK compared to the US which spends over 17% of GDP on health care, and seeing as everybody in the UK is covered by the NHS and can also purchase private insurance if they like, 8.5% of gdp is not bad.

mawilson · May 10, 2012

Health care expenditure is still low in the UK compared to the US which spends over 17% of GDP on health care, and seeing as everybody in the UK is covered by the NHS and can also purchase private insurance if they like, 8.5% of gdp is not bad.

But how do you explain the skyrocketing costs of healthcare in the UK? Can't blame Obama or insurance companies.

B_J · May 10, 2012

But how do you explain the skyrocketing costs of healthcare in the UK? Can't blame Obama or insurance companies.

It's Bush's fault.

Mr. Big Dog · May 10, 2012

The health insurance industry profit margin is only about 3-4%.

Still enough to fund golden parachute in excess of a billion dollars (yes, that's billion with a B) for the fired UHG CEO back in 2006. In pieces of $1MM, such a parachute looks something like this. Seeing how these insurance companies don't make health care any less expensive, I'd say that money could well have been saved.

$1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00

Edited May 10, 2012 by Mr. Big Dog

Mr. Big Dog · May 10, 2012

But how do you explain the skyrocketing costs of healthcare in the UK? Can't blame Obama or insurance companies.

Did the UK not also open up the health care market to private insurers allowing people to opt out of the NHS? I know that they've done that in Germany and - this might be a coincidence - health care costs have risen ever more since that happened. I'm not saying that the introduction of private, for profit insurance has been causing that increase but it appears to have happened in the same timeframe.

Sign In

Health care increasingly out of reach for millions of Americans

140 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Mr. Big Dog

Obama 2012

Rebecca Jo

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in