Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[Cover Point]

will reply to cost and such when i have time

but let me just tell you profit margin does not mean they are making less money. The millions in exec comp does eat a bit into that. There is a lot of money used in those top salaries

[indcric]

will reply to cost and such when i have time

but let me just tell you profit margin does not mean they are making less money. The millions in exec comp does eat a bit into that. There is a lot of money used in those top salaries

Yeah. I thought I would include that I didn't look at these companies' executive compensation bit in my post, but I forgot somehow. Executive compensations are disclosed in annual reports. If you have time, please look at them and let me know.

It is a great debate about why the shareholders are allowing this type of board of directors, since board approves the executive compensation. If a board gives too much importance to executive compensation than the company's profits, then there is something wrong with the board. If the executive compensation is eating up the company's profits, how does the board allow it?

[Cover Point]

again .... i did this quickly googled profit for bcbs (one of the insurance companies)

in 2009 the CEO salary went up by 26%
http://www.boston.com/business/healthcare/articles/2009/02/28/blue_cross_ceos_pay_rose_26/

here is more exec profits for bcbs (only googled them)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/09/blue-cross-blue-shield-ex_n_281282.html

and these guys get special tax incentives

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/health-care-reform/2009/05/by_ceci_connolly_one_week.html

[ruchir]

I don't agree with your point that Health insurance should be a lot like auto insurance. Health care is a much more complex topic than handling an automobile. Not all individuals understand it good enough. Not many individuals including me can't build a health plan like I build an auto insurance policy. The health plan I have now is more complex than the auto insurance policy that I have. If I mess with my policy and make a bad decision of say having lower limits to decrease my premiums, at the most I may damage my vehicle  and other vehicles on the road and end up paying for them out of pocket or at the most I get bankrupt. My credit history goes totally bad and I may not be able to buy any vehicle later.

But what if I mess with my health plan and opt for lower limits? How many people know how to maintain their weight or lose weight? How many people know how to stay healthy? How many people know how much damage can be done by just skipping breakfast for a few years? Is health in our hands always? What if there is an epidemic like H1N1 or some other hereditary disease? When I can no longer pay the claims, I become bankrupt and I can't get any other health policy from any insurance company, what about my current diseases? How do I treat them?

I can't simply pay a portion of the cost upfront, because most of the procedures cost more than my monthly savings. Later claiming it from insurance company? Don't you know how much complex and risky it is? Did you ever see a claim handled properly by these insurance people? Don't you know how long you have to wait on the phone to talk to a claims representative?What if the claim is not processed to my satisfaction? Do I have to go to court or whatever the government regulatory authority? What are the costs of hiring an attorney for every claim?

Almost every time, even now, my doctor tells me why a test is needed. So, I don't need to argue with him for that. May be that is because of the HMO plans that I have. These HMO plans didn't prevent me from asking a doctor to prescribe more tests to diagnose the symptoms correctly beyond my doubt, even when the doctor was quite sure of the problem. I am mostly fine with what I have right now.

Let me tackle this part of your comment first. It will come in handy later. To begin with, I'm not saying this particular idea of mine is a great idea. It's just a debatable idea that germinated in my mind.

A. Sure health insurance is complex than auto insurance. So would you leave a complex thing completely in the hands of an agent or a company who allegedly wants to make money off it? Or in the hands of a govt that can't run something as simple as Post Office properly? Look, I'm not saying that insurance providers should sell only customizable plans. No. Even auto insurance providers have pre-built plans that they explain to you. If you like them, you buy them. If you don't, then you can customize them any way you want. What I'm saying is, if similar facility is given to customize pre-built health plans then it will save consumers money.

B. Auto or health, insurance is insurance, right? You buy insurance for the unexpected event. Now, poor people usually buy liability auto insurance. Why? Do they think they won't get into accidents? No so. They buy the cheaper liability insurance because that's what they can afford. So what happens when they do get into an accident by their own fault? Tough luck. They loose their vehicle or face expenditure on it. Still, they take the risk because that's what they can afford. You don't force everyone to buy comprehensive auto insurance, do you? Even if they don't understand the risks involved with liability insurance, people are still allowed to buy it. I'm saying let people do the same with health insurance. Let people buy only catastrophic health insurance that covers only hospital related expenses. Since insurance provider will not have to pay for regular doctor visits, tests, medicine etc. the plan will be cheaper than other plans. Who will buy such a plan? Those who are poor or those who think they are in good health. Instead of not buying any insurance, just give them this option of buying only catastrophic insurance. They may not understand the risk of not having a regular health plan, so be it. At least they will be covered in hospital. You talked about going bankrupt because of medical expenses. Catastrophic plan would prevent exactly that. People don't go bankrupt by making regular visits to doctor. They go bankrupt because of an extended hospital stay.

C. I can fully understand your apprehension about building your own health plan. But understand one thing, a guy like you or me will not exactly build their health plan. They will rather choose from a pre-built health plan. So you or me don't have to worry about complexities of a health plan. A healthy 27 year old would like to build a plan and pay less money. Since he is choosing to do this, he will have to understand the complexities. If he can't and he still goes ahead then it is his own risk that he is willing to take. I'm saying give him this opportunity to make this choice and pay less. Another person to go for a customized plan would be someone earning low to moderate salary - say $50K. Again, if he chooses to build his plan, then he will have to understand the terms and coverage of the plan. People take such risks in life all the time, to make their life comfortable. They just should have the option to do so.

D. I'm sure H1N1 kind of epidemics will be considered catastrophic. Now comes hereditary deceases, and lack of health knowledge. Yes, many people face these problems. So what to do about it? Life is tough. Some people live comfortable, healthy life, some don't. The idea is to make life as easy as possible for those who are sick. One way is to have some kind of insurance available for them. That's why I keep saying that health insurance should be as flexible as possible. If people want a comprehensive plan, then fine, buy one.  If they can't buy a comprehensive, then they should be able to buy whatever they can. Trouble is health insurance companies don't sell flexible plans. I'm not sure why. Whether they willingly don't sell customized or there is some law or regulation stopping them… whatever. My opinion is that if we are able to customize health plans to suit our needs and finances, it will go a long way in more people buying some sort of a plan.

E. About filing a court case against an insurance company, I think these cases are usually civil cases. In civil cases, if I file a case against an insurance company, my lawyer usually does not ask me for money right away. If I win the case, then insurance company pays my lawyer's fee along with compensation. If I don't, I have to pay my lawyer out of pocket.

F. Medical Tests - I made the point about medical tests keeping in mind what can be done to bring insurance premiums down. I'm not talking about blood-work for diabetics or x-rays for joint pains etc. For example, my neighbor's parents came to visit him from India. His mother had chest pains. He took her to the doctor. They did a heart MRI. Said there was blockage and by-pass was needed. He took her to another doctor for 2nd opinion. That doctor did the same MRI again. He did not accept first doctor's MRI. Here is where I raise my point. I had said earlier that it would be better if patients filed their insurance claims themselves for reimbursements. This means they will shop for cheap and best doctor and will question doctor. So, my friend did not think twice before doing the 2nd MRI because he was not paying a huge sum of money out of pocket. If he was paying out of pocket, he would have questioned the 2nd doctor why another MRI was needed. So, what happens is that the insurance company pays for the 2nd MRI too, when it could have been avoided. This is one example. Hundreds of thousand of examples like this happen every day. Insurance companies pay for unnecessary tests. Since they pay this money, they charge it back through monthly premiums. If you reduce unnecessary expenditure, it definitely comes back in the way of reduced monthly premiums. One way to achieve this is to have consumer file the claim, instead of the doctor. Consumer can straight away reduce the dollar amount of claim. If claims of less amount are filed, insurance company will pay less. Slowly this will result in decreased monthly premium. Now, you will say how will consumer pay doctor or hospital charges out of pocket? Well, doctor fee is usually less than $100 or $150. Since you are shopping for cheap and best doctor, you will choose the one you can pay. If you go to hospital, you are not asked to pay out of pocket. You get a bill in mail. A mechanism can be created where hospital give you 60 or NN days to file a claim and get money. If claim is delayed then a payment plan can be set.

G. Now, what if the insurance company delays or gives trouble? You can file a case. Courts in US are not like India. Here cases are adjudicated quickly. And here is where my opinion against a govt run plan comes. You can file a case against a private company and hope to win. Will you be able to file a case against govt? Even if you do, will you hope to win? If govt run insurance provider gives you trouble, what is your recourse?

H. Wait Time - I don't know how to reduce wait time. Maybe by having more doctors? I don't think there is a big wait time to see family doctors. I get next-day appointments, or if it is urgent I just go in and wait the doctor to be free. If you have to see a specialist, then of course you need appointment.



You asked me to give a few points to improve health insurance reform. Here they are:

1. No refusal for pre-existing condition. (self explanatory)
2. Customizable health plans. (explained above)
3. Option to buy catastrophic health insurance. (explained above)
4. Allow companies to sell insurance in all states. I purchase family health insurance for 3, including dental and vision, in North Carolina through BCBS-NC for just $250 per month. In Maryland BCBS-MD was selling it for $640. If BCBS-NC is allowed to sell their plan in MD, competition will bring prices down.
5. Limit on compensation on cases on doctors. (self explanatory)
6. Make health insurance premium tax-deductible. (self explanatory)
7. Another idea I have is to make personal health insurance work like employer based group health insurance. Say you assemble a group of 100 people, and approach BCBS and say that we 100 people would like to buy group insurance from you, will you give us discounted rates? If BCBS gives them discounted rates, consumers get cheaper insurance, BCBS gets 100 customers. Win-win for both.
8. Encourage private Co-Op pharmacies. In MD, I used to buy medicine from a pharmacy called Co-Op Pharmacy. It was a collection of pharmacies spread throughout MD. They buy medicine from pharm. companies at discounted rates and sell them cheap. Only one thing - you have to have annual membership with them. How much does this membership cost? $15 for one year!!!!!! And if you are a member, you get discount on groceries too!! Yes, it is a pharmacy + grocery shop. I use to buy antibiotics from this pharmacy - 10 day dose - for just $7.00!! It didn't matter whether I had insurance or not. $7 was their flat rate. Imagine that!!!!!


What I don't like in the House health bill. Here are some issues (I haven't read all of the 2500 pages):

-- Too big, confusing, to understand
-- Every representative, who voted in favor, did not read the bill, does not know what is in it
-- Public option
-- Fine and jail for people not having health insurance
-- Increase tax on high-salary people
-- Reduce payment give to service providers
-- Taxes employers 2% - 8% of payroll for not giving health options, when actual health spending by employers is more than that.
-- New taxes on medical instruments
-- Reduce medicare by $500B
-- Illegal aliens have access to medicaid (no need to deny this for House Bill)

[Cover Point]

- Illegal aliens have access to medicaid (no need to deny this for House Bill)

Ruchir, you forgot death panels and the mandatory killing of grandma.

[dextrous]

"So you or me don't have to worry about complexities of a health plan. "

sounds a whole lot like the current situation...let the corporations decide whether we are sick or not and accordingly reimburse what they like

[Cover Point]

if anyone says that today's insurance scam situation is anywhere close to being acceptable then they really have to stop watching fox news.

There is this alternate sense of reality  that the republicans paint of a rosy world that Bush has left us with no regulations and all the corporations taking good care of all our needs.

We are the only (first world) country that profits from people's ill health. I have yet to hear ONE Effing idea from the right on how to reduce the cost of care. OK maybe i am wrong. I have heard one idea.... tort reform... and i agree with that. BUT everything else is made to be a scam.

if these right wingers are so free market why wont they let us buy drugs from canada? Is canadian medicine that bad? Are people dying from poor medicine there? the fact that people who dont make millions actually support that is a clear indictment of the US education and news system.

Today, many americans die for lack of good insurance.

The biggest point is that WITHOUT reform the costs wont come down ... i work close to the health care industry (as in i have visibility to what goes on) and i can tell you it is an industry that thrives solely on lack of transparency. And no one wants to address that.

Obama said this right the other day to the Republican cons. Just saying no to everything that is proposed is not legislating. That is just politics.

The republican health plan (and colbert pointed this out) is this http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare. Its a Effing NINE page document. This is the amount of thought these guys have put into it.

Yes. Its easier to say death panels and obama wants to kill grandma than to come up with anything concrete yourself

[ruchir]

- Illegal aliens have access to medicaid (no need to deny this for House Bill)

Ruchir, you forgot death panels and the mandatory killing of grandma.

What is there to forget in truth? Taking of $500billion from Medicare IS killing your grandma. Let me know if it is anything else. Forcing doctors (who will accept govt plan) to talk to patient about end-of-life planning IS death panels, because House plans actually pays doctors for this so-called TALK. Let me know if this is anything else.

Aunty, let us have an issue-by-issue discussion, instead of personality bashing. I can bash Obama all day long, for his intellectual bankruptcy, but that won't mean anything.

[ruchir]

"So you or me don't have to worry about complexities of a health plan. "

sounds a whole lot like the current situation...let the corporations decide whether we are sick or not and accordingly reimburse what they like

If you don't agree with the reimbursement, you go to court. Thousands of people do that and win.

What will you do when you don't agree with the govt plan, run by govt? Where will you go? Who will you turn to? Think about that. You feel that corporations are not fit to decide anything. Fine, nothing wrong with that. But then why do you feel govt bureaucrats are any better equipped to decide anything about your health? Why this contradiction? Corporates are run by humans, and so will be govt health insurance.

Name one govt department that you think runs just fine. Now name one department that you think could be run better if it was not run by govt babus. People prefer FedEx over USPS when they need to mail something important. Why? There has to be a reason why a privately run mail server is preferred over a govt run mail service. And this is just mail.... how much money you spend on mailing in an entire year? $20? $50? And people still prefer a private carrier. They are able to do so because their expenditure on mail is very small. Now think about how a health insurance will be run by the same govt bureaucracy and machinery, something on which you spend about $6K, 7K a year. If you can't trust govt with your mail, will you trust it with your health?

Private industry knows that if it looses customers, it will get hurt financially. If there is competition in the market, every business will do anything to attract customers. They know their existence depends on it. Govt, on the other hand, works exactly opposite. A govt employee gets paid irrespective of how he works, because more often than not his job is saved by a union. So, a govt bureaucrat operating govt health insurance will not worry about attracting customers. Tomorrow, if govt health plan goes into a Trillion dollar deficit, and orders come to stop giving certain medicine to old people, to save money, this bureaucrat will do just that. He doesn't care about the customer. His job is safe. This goes all the way up. People running govt plan can take absolutely any decision they want, without any fear, because they know no harm can come to their employment. There is no downside.

You don't like Patriot Act, do you? I'm sure you don't and if I'm not wrong, you don't like it because it makes govt too powerful. It gives govt more control over you than what you desire. Same is the case with govt run health insurance. If govt decides to stop giving old people medicines they desperately need, where will they go? In which court will they dream of winning against the govt? If Obamacare accepts Ezekiel Emanuel's Quality-Adjusted Life-Years calculation formula, who will save the grandmas then? Read about his formula. He is Rahm Emanuel's brother and Obama's adviser.

[ruchir]

We are the only (first world) country that profits from people's ill health. I have yet to hear ONE Effing idea from the right on how to reduce the cost of care. OK maybe i am wrong. I have heard one idea.... tort reform... and i agree with that. BUT everything else is made to be a scam.

Don't call me a republican, but I listed some ideas above. You have not discussed them (I'm not sure you even read them). Please read them. They are highly debatable ideas. I'm not a genius. I just thought of what could be done without involving govt.

if these right wingers are so free market why wont they let us buy drugs from canada? Is canadian medicine that bad? Are people dying from poor medicine there? the fact that people who dont make millions actually support that is a clear indictment of the US education and news system.

If you go to Canada, buy medicine, come back to US, is someone going to arrest you?

Today, many americans die for lack of good insurance.

Many Americans die of common cold, HIV, car accidents... People die because of hunger too. People die because of lack of housing too. People die because of lack of clothes too. I'm not saying it is okay for people to not have insurance. No. Everyone should have a chance to buy insurance but you have to understand one thing. LIFE IS TOUGH. Govt can not provide everything to everyone. People die in those countries too where there is govt run health insurance. In fact, people there are no more happy with their insurance than people of US.

The biggest point is that WITHOUT reform the costs wont come down ... i work close to the health care industry (as in i have visibility to what goes on) and i can tell you it is an industry that thrives solely on lack of transparency. And no one wants to address that.

Completely agree with you. Reform have to happen. Health insurance industry has to run better. Where we differ is what steps should be taken. You say, govt should intervene by creating it's own insurance and that will solve many problems. I say govt should stay away, and rather create an environment through policies, oversight and regulations that makes the industry run better. I say govt insurance will create more problems than what it will solve. Take a look at any govt department. Which one is run fine? I say pin-point the issues in health insurance industry and solve them, rather than creating an alternative insurance system.

Obama said this right the other day to the Republican cons. Just saying no to everything that is proposed is not legislating. That is just politics.

I will argue that it is Obama who is saying NO to everything Republicans are putting in front of him. It is Obama who is the "Man of No". Who says that Obama and Pelosi and Reid are such geniuses that all their ideas on Health reform are brilliant? Why should anyone believe that? Republicans are on record saying that they have given many of their plans and ideas to Obama and his administration but no one have go back to them in nearly 7-8 months!!! How come no one is discussing that? How come no one is calling Obama the "Man of No"? It is the Democrats who are the biggest cons.

The republican health plan (and colbert pointed this out) is this http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare. Its a Effing NINE page document. This is the amount of thought these guys have put into it.

A nine-page document that everyone can understand and comprehend is way way way way way better than a 2500 page dinosaur that no one has read, no one understands, no one comprehends.

Yes. Its easier to say death panels and obama wants to kill grandma than to come up with anything concrete yourself

Death Panels and grandma killings have been described above.

[Cover Point]

"So you or me don't have to worry about complexities of a health plan. "

sounds a whole lot like the current situation...let the corporations decide whether we are sick or not and accordingly reimburse what they like

If you don't agree with the reimbursement, you go to court. Thousands of people do that and win.

What will you do when you don't agree with the govt plan, run by govt? Where will you go? Who will you turn to? Think about that. You feel that corporations are not fit to decide anything. Fine, nothing wrong with that. But then why do you feel govt bureaucrats are any better equipped to decide anything about your health? Why this contradiction? Corporates are run by humans, and so will be govt health insurance.

Name one govt department that you think runs just fine. Now name one department that you think could be run better if it was not run by govt babus. People prefer FedEx over USPS when they need to mail something important. Why? There has to be a reason why a privately run mail server is preferred over a govt run mail service. And this is just mail.... how much money you spend on mailing in an entire year? $20? $50? And people still prefer a private carrier. They are able to do so because their expenditure on mail is very small. Now think about how a health insurance will be run by the same govt bureaucracy and machinery, something on which you spend about $6K, 7K a year. If you can't trust govt with your mail, will you trust it with your health?

the talk was of a PUBLIC OPTION. No one said that is the only plan that should be there.

The fact that Fedex can still survive with the govt run (cheaper) Post office tells me there is no problem with having an OPTION. You, the rich dude, can still choose the Fedex or the private plan. Let the poor people like me use the Govt option (or Postal service ... which I did use recently to send a check to our republican friend WN ).

The problem today is of lack of competition. The issue the republicans have is that they dont want govt to compete. Bush is the one who got us into the jam with the big pharma that prohibits us from negotiating with them. Thats not open markets. That is protectionism for a select few at the cost of the general public. 

[Cover Point]

if these right wingers are so free market why wont they let us buy drugs from canada? Is canadian medicine that bad? Are people dying from poor medicine there? the fact that people who dont make millions actually support that is a clear indictment of the US education and news system.

If you go to Canada, buy medicine, come back to US, is someone going to arrest you?

Yes they will arrest me. It is illegal to transport drugs illegally. And I guess that is what is to be expected in a republican plan. "they dont have bread ... let the effing masses eat cake?" They dont have cheap medicine in the US ... fly using a private plane and go to canada and buy cheaper drugs there. Nice. Bush did have his impact on even smart people like you

Today, many americans die for lack of good insurance.

Many Americans die of common cold, HIV, car accidents... People die because of hunger too. People die because of lack of housing too. People die because of lack of clothes too. I'm not saying it is okay for people to not have insurance. No. Everyone should have a chance to buy insurance but you have to understand one thing. LIFE IS TOUGH. Govt can not provide everything to everyone. People die in those countries too where there is govt run health insurance. In fact, people there are no more happy with their insurance than people of US.

Health care is not a privilege. It should be a right in a first world country. If you think that is not the government's responsibility (To make affordable health care available ... and affordable to everyone ... not just rich people like you) then we have a fundamental difference. Its amost a  Ganguly - GC thing

The biggest point is that WITHOUT reform the costs wont come down ... i work close to the health care industry (as in i have visibility to what goes on) and i can tell you it is an industry that thrives solely on lack of transparency. And no one wants to address that.

Completely agree with you. Reform have to happen. Health insurance industry has to run better. Where we differ is what steps should be taken. You say, govt should intervene by creating it's own insurance and that will solve many problems. I say govt should stay away, and rather create an environment through policies, oversight and regulations that makes the industry run better. I say govt insurance will create more problems than what it will solve. Take a look at any govt department. Which one is run fine? I say pin-point the issues in health insurance industry and solve them, rather than creating an alternative insurance system.

Again. Govt is not providing the sole insurance. We are talking of a Public OPTION. If govt runs so poorly, why do you think republicans are so scared of private companies competing with them?

They know that currently the rich (insurance, large hospitals and the AMA) are fleecing the general public. With a govt run competition, even that is run inefficiently, they would have to make cuts to stay competitive.

My biggest beef is not that the Obama plan is perfect. far from it. My beef is that the right just rejects things. Take the govt option and they should try to negotiate some safe guards about that getting subsidized overly to run the private insurers out of business. The republicans should make a level playing field. Unfortunately they want to act like gangulians and not allow the others to even take the field.

Obama said this right the other day to the Republican cons. Just saying no to everything that is proposed is not legislating. That is just politics.

I will argue that it is Obama who is saying NO to everything Republicans are putting in front of him. It is Obama who is the "Man of No". Who says that Obama and Pelosi and Reid are such geniuses that all their ideas on Health reform are brilliant? Why should anyone believe that? Republicans are on record saying that they have given many of their plans and ideas to Obama and his administration but no one have go back to them in nearly 7-8 months!!! How come no one is discussing that? How come no one is calling Obama the "Man of No"? It is the Democrats who are the biggest cons.

I posted the link to the right's plan. its effing NINE pages. if thats what the gop "thinks" about the complex topic, then we again have a disagreement.

What are some of the concrete ideas that they have brought up? Other than the tort reform (agree with it) or death panels.

The republican health plan (and colbert pointed this out) is this http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare. Its a Effing NINE page document. This is the amount of thought these guys have put into it.

A nine-page document that everyone can understand and comprehend is way way way way way better than a 2500 page dinosaur that no one has read, no one understands, no one comprehends.

If something this complex can be covered in 9 pages then this no longer is an intellectual conversation and we should switch exclusively to discussing why Ganguly stole bread from little kids.

Yes. Its easier to say death panels and obama wants to kill grandma than to come up with anything concrete yourself

Death Panels and grandma killings have been described above.

Come now. thats not explaining. Thats being a bill o'reilly


PS: Ganguly sucks

[ruchir]

"So you or me don't have to worry about complexities of a health plan. "

sounds a whole lot like the current situation...let the corporations decide whether we are sick or not and accordingly reimburse what they like

If you don't agree with the reimbursement, you go to court. Thousands of people do that and win.

What will you do when you don't agree with the govt plan, run by govt? Where will you go? Who will you turn to? Think about that. You feel that corporations are not fit to decide anything. Fine, nothing wrong with that. But then why do you feel govt bureaucrats are any better equipped to decide anything about your health? Why this contradiction? Corporates are run by humans, and so will be govt health insurance.

Name one govt department that you think runs just fine. Now name one department that you think could be run better if it was not run by govt babus. People prefer FedEx over USPS when they need to mail something important. Why? There has to be a reason why a privately run mail server is preferred over a govt run mail service. And this is just mail.... how much money you spend on mailing in an entire year? $20? $50? And people still prefer a private carrier. They are able to do so because their expenditure on mail is very small. Now think about how a health insurance will be run by the same govt bureaucracy and machinery, something on which you spend about $6K, 7K a year. If you can't trust govt with your mail, will you trust it with your health?

the talk was of a PUBLIC OPTION. No one said that is the only plan that should be there.

The fact that Fedex can still survive with the govt run (cheaper) Post office tells me there is no problem with having an OPTION. You, the rich dude, can still choose the Fedex or the private plan. Let the poor people like me use the Govt option (or Postal service ... which I did use recently to send a check to our republican friend WN ).

The problem today is of lack of competition. The issue the republicans have is that they dont want govt to compete. Bush is the one who got us into the jam with the big pharma that prohibits us from negotiating with them. Thats not open markets. That is protectionism for a select few at the cost of the general public.

Aunty, FedEx survives not simply because it operates better than USPS. FedEx is able to survive because monthly or yearly expenditure on postage by a household is so less that they are able to choose between a good service and mediocre to bad service.

USPS charges you for you to use it's services. Right? And that charge is not very cheap from Fed Ex charge. Take any comparable service between FedEx and USPS, and you will find that there won't be a huge difference in their charges.

When it comes to Govt health plan, they will sell it for dirt cheap because their intention is to cover those who can't afford to buy other plans. Since the customers are poor, the plan will HAVE to be sold dirt cheap or maybe ever for free... otherwise those poor people won't be able to afford it. This is my premise of the govt plan.

Now let us see how it will be executed. So, to begin with, govt is selling their insurance dirt cheap. Next, they say any company that does not buy health insurance for it's employees will pay 2%-8% of employee's payroll cost as fine. That is cheaper than actually paying for employee's health insurance. So what will the employer do? He will drop the insurance and pay the fine. So, in one stroke of pen, millions and millions will loose employer based health insurance. That will include me and you too. Now, what options do we have to buy health insurance, except to go for the govt plan?

Since private insurance companies will loose millions of customers, they will be forced to either close their shops or make their existing plans costlier, to cover for the lost revenue. Within 7-8 years, most private insurance will go out of business because they won't have enough customers.

This will result in govt MONOPOLY in health insurance industry. MONOPOLY is something that every govt has discouraged in every industry, and here is Obama trying to create a govt monopoly in health industry.

You blame Bush and Republicans for big pharma, no negotiations etc. Can you cite and rules, policies, laws specifically created by Bush or Republicans in this regard?

[ruchir]

Yes they will arrest me. It is illegal to transport drugs illegally. And I guess that is what is to be expected in a republican plan. "they dont have bread ... let the effing masses eat cake?" They dont have cheap medicine in the US ... fly using a private plane and go to canada and buy cheaper drugs there. Nice. Bush did have his impact on even smart people like you

I have been to Canada. Not flied, but driven. No one checked me or my car for anything.

Health care is not a privilege. It should be a right in a first world country. If you think that is not the government's responsibility (To make affordable health care available ... and affordable to everyone ... not just rich people like you) then we have a fundamental difference. Its amost a  Ganguly - GC thing

You may want to ask Obama to amend the constitution to make health insurance a right. Currently it is not.

Yes, we do have a fundamental difference. In US, if you are poor, homeless, have no mode of transport, nothing to eat, tell me what will you do with free health insurance? When you are dying of hunger, what will you do with medicine?

For others, if they don't have health insurance, they go to ER. No one in US is refused from an ER.

I think you are basically confusing between insurance problems and health care problems. Health care is available to everyone in US. No one is ever refused. The problem comes in insurance. In order to take care of insurance, we don't need to make it a fundamental right. We need to fix the way insurance industry works.

By the way, before you make health insurance a fundamental right, think about making free food, free clothes, free house fundamental rights too. They are more important than free insurance. That's why I said, govt can not take care of everything for everyone. Life is tough.

Again. Govt is not providing the sole insurance. We are talking of a Public OPTION. If govt runs so poorly, why do you think republicans are so scared of private companies competing with them?

They know that currently the rich (insurance, large hospitals and the AMA) are fleecing the general public. With a govt run competition, even that is run inefficiently, they would have to make cuts to stay competitive.

My biggest beef is not that the Obama plan is perfect. far from it. My beef is that the right just rejects things. Take the govt option and they should try to negotiate some safe guards about that getting subsidized overly to run the private insurers out of business. The republicans should make a level playing field. Unfortunately they want to act like gangulians and not allow the others to even take the field.

I explained above that if govt option come out, it will remove private insurance companies so quickly that before anyone realizes how bad govt plan is, the damage will be done. There will be no private health insurance.

If you think right refuses everything, what is left doing? Why is left refusing to even consider any Rep. idea? Clap is done by two hands, not one.

I posted the link to the right's plan. its effing NINE pages. if thats what the gop "thinks" about the complex topic, then we again have a disagreement.

What are some of the concrete ideas that they have brought up? Other than the tort reform (agree with it) or death panels.

Can you read, understand and comprehend those 9 pages? Now tell me, can you read, understand and comprehend the 2500 page House plan?

The idea is to start with something small and then build on it.

If something this complex can be covered in 9 pages then this no longer is an intellectual conversation and we should switch exclusively to discussing why Ganguly stole bread from little kids.

Yet another example of madness from left. Why do you want to tackle everything at the same time and fall flat on your face? Why can't you start tackling issues one at a time and do it successfully?

Come now. thats not explaining. Thats being a bill o'reilly

No, that plain old me.

PS: Ganguly sucks

You betcha... 

[Cover Point]

"So you or me don't have to worry about complexities of a health plan. "

sounds a whole lot like the current situation...let the corporations decide whether we are sick or not and accordingly reimburse what they like

If you don't agree with the reimbursement, you go to court. Thousands of people do that and win.

What will you do when you don't agree with the govt plan, run by govt? Where will you go? Who will you turn to? Think about that. You feel that corporations are not fit to decide anything. Fine, nothing wrong with that. But then why do you feel govt bureaucrats are any better equipped to decide anything about your health? Why this contradiction? Corporates are run by humans, and so will be govt health insurance.

Name one govt department that you think runs just fine. Now name one department that you think could be run better if it was not run by govt babus. People prefer FedEx over USPS when they need to mail something important. Why? There has to be a reason why a privately run mail server is preferred over a govt run mail service. And this is just mail.... how much money you spend on mailing in an entire year? $20? $50? And people still prefer a private carrier. They are able to do so because their expenditure on mail is very small. Now think about how a health insurance will be run by the same govt bureaucracy and machinery, something on which you spend about $6K, 7K a year. If you can't trust govt with your mail, will you trust it with your health?

the talk was of a PUBLIC OPTION. No one said that is the only plan that should be there.

The fact that Fedex can still survive with the govt run (cheaper) Post office tells me there is no problem with having an OPTION. You, the rich dude, can still choose the Fedex or the private plan. Let the poor people like me use the Govt option (or Postal service ... which I did use recently to send a check to our republican friend WN ).

The problem today is of lack of competition. The issue the republicans have is that they dont want govt to compete. Bush is the one who got us into the jam with the big pharma that prohibits us from negotiating with them. Thats not open markets. That is protectionism for a select few at the cost of the general public.

Aunty, FedEx survives not simply because it operates better than USPS. FedEx is able to survive because monthly or yearly expenditure on postage by a household is so less that they are able to choose between a good service and mediocre to bad service.

USPS charges you for you to use it's services. Right? And that charge is not very cheap from Fed Ex charge. Take any comparable service between FedEx and USPS, and you will find that there won't be a huge difference in their charges.

When it comes to Govt health plan, they will sell it for dirt cheap because their intention is to cover those who can't afford to buy other plans. Since the customers are poor, the plan will HAVE to be sold dirt cheap or maybe ever for free... otherwise those poor people won't be able to afford it. This is my premise of the govt plan.

Now let us see how it will be executed. So, to begin with, govt is selling their insurance dirt cheap. Next, they say any company that does not buy health insurance for it's employees will pay 2%-8% of employee's payroll cost as fine. That is cheaper than actually paying for employee's health insurance. So what will the employer do? He will drop the insurance and pay the fine. So, in one stroke of pen, millions and millions will loose employer based health insurance. That will include me and you too. Now, what options do we have to buy health insurance, except to go for the govt plan?

Since private insurance companies will loose millions of customers, they will be forced to either close their shops or make their existing plans costlier, to cover for the lost revenue. Within 7-8 years, most private insurance will go out of business because they won't have enough customers.

This will result in govt MONOPOLY in health insurance industry. MONOPOLY is something that every govt has discouraged in every industry, and here is Obama trying to create a govt monopoly in health industry.

You blame Bush and Republicans for big pharma, no negotiations etc. Can you cite and rules, policies, laws specifically created by Bush or Republicans in this regard?

Monopoly? There is a huge jump you made here. Same jump that Fox news has been selling too. Too many supposed things that would happen. First, how can Govt make their insurance cheaper? The govt plan will be competing with the private plan. Why are private companies so afraid of a competition? When forced to compete maybe they will be able to squeeze some savings from places today they are not inclined. Health Care is a monopoly today. MOST states have no real choice. Insurance is being run in most states by only one or 2 big insurance companies who have no desire or incentive to reduce costs.

Having a big competition is always going to be a good thing. If the new competition is inefficient like the govt then insurance companies should be happy.

you cant have it both ways sir!

[Cover Point]

Yes they will arrest me. It is illegal to transport drugs illegally. And I guess that is what is to be expected in a republican plan. "they dont have bread ... let the effing masses eat cake?" They dont have cheap medicine in the US ... fly using a private plane and go to canada and buy cheaper drugs there. Nice. Bush did have his impact on even smart people like you

I have been to Canada. Not flied, but driven. No one checked me or my car for anything.

so you are saying that since you were able to get away with criminal activity and illegal cross border drug trafficking everyone else should do that too. Come now. I am still afraid of Bush

Health care is not a privilege. It should be a right in a first world country. If you think that is not the government's responsibility (To make affordable health care available ... and affordable to everyone ... not just rich people like you) then we have a fundamental difference. Its amost a  Ganguly - GC thing

You may want to ask Obama to amend the constitution to make health insurance a right. Currently it is not.

I think thats exactly what he is trying to do albeit via legislature .... unfortunately you republicans and Fox news wont let him. I am glad you are coming around though.

Yes, we do have a fundamental difference. In US, if you are poor, homeless, have no mode of transport, nothing to eat, tell me what will you do with free health insurance? When you are dying of hunger, what will you do with medicine?

I see. So since we are not giving them food or shelter the solution is not to fix that problem but to use that as an excuse to do even more horrible things to the poor.  I guess your premise is that we are a cruel nation who should not take care of its people. I respectfully disagree.

For others, if they don't have health insurance, they go to ER. No one in US is refused from an ER.

and thats working so great isnt it. 

I think you are basically confusing between insurance problems and health care problems. Health care is available to everyone in US. No one is ever refused. The problem comes in insurance. In order to take care of insurance, we don't need to make it a fundamental right. We need to fix the way insurance industry works.

First HC is NOT available to everyone. Atleast not acceptable level of care. So lets get that straight.

And yes insurance industry needs to be fixed. We cant agree more. I think thats what Obama wants to do ... along with a few more things. The republicans wont let him do it. Please talk to them at the next meeting since we now agree on this point.

By the way, before you make health insurance a fundamental right, think about making free food, free clothes, free house fundamental rights too. They are more important than free insurance. That's why I said, govt can not take care of everything for everyone. Life is tough.

No one said it all should be free. Reasonable access to all of them should be a fundamental right. So free food and clothes and shelter is already in place. It is called Social Security/Welfare/food stamps whatever. It exists today in your country. Now just need to address the health care stuff.

Again. Govt is not providing the sole insurance. We are talking of a Public OPTION. If govt runs so poorly, why do you think republicans are so scared of private companies competing with them?

They know that currently the rich (insurance, large hospitals and the AMA) are fleecing the general public. With a govt run competition, even that is run inefficiently, they would have to make cuts to stay competitive.

My biggest beef is not that the Obama plan is perfect. far from it. My beef is that the right just rejects things. Take the govt option and they should try to negotiate some safe guards about that getting subsidized overly to run the private insurers out of business. The republicans should make a level playing field. Unfortunately they want to act like gangulians and not allow the others to even take the field.

I explained above that if govt option come out, it will remove private insurance companies so quickly that before anyone realizes how bad govt plan is, the damage will be done. There will be no private health insurance.

And I think thats a major obfuscation (ha ha thanks Pitamah) of the facts purported by Fox News and the republicans. Thats a scare tactic being used to hammer the death nails into the Reform coffin.

If you think right refuses everything, what is left doing? Why is left refusing to even consider any Rep. idea? Clap is done by two hands, not one.

well if you mean those 9 pages are the ideas .... i guess we can have a fifth grader read those. Come now. There is nothing concrete or constructive that has come out of the right. They want a status quo since that makes their rich constituents happy.

I posted the link to the right's plan. its effing NINE pages. if thats what the gop "thinks" about the complex topic, then we again have a disagreement.

What are some of the concrete ideas that they have brought up? Other than the tort reform (agree with it) or death panels.

Can you read, understand and comprehend those 9 pages? Now tell me, can you read, understand and comprehend the 2500 page House plan?

The idea is to start with something small and then build on it.

Again the biggest joke. We did not elect officials to go teach 5th graders. We have law makers who should be able to read more than 9 pages. Also should be able to come up with something substantial. A real reform.

If something this complex can be covered in 9 pages then this no longer is an intellectual conversation and we should switch exclusively to discussing why Ganguly stole bread from little kids.

Yet another example of madness from left. Why do you want to tackle everything at the same time and fall flat on your face? Why can't you start tackling issues one at a time and do it successfully?

because then you will be blamed for not thinking everything through completely. Thats what Bush did and we saw how that worked out.

Come now. thats not explaining. Thats being a bill o'reilly

No, that plain old me.

so are you saying you are like Bill?

PS: Ganguly sucks

You betcha... 

now that last comment would make Palin proud

[ruchir]

Monopoly? There is a huge jump you made here. Same jump that Fox news has been selling too. Too many supposed things that would happen. First, how can Govt make their insurance cheaper? The govt plan will be competing with the private plan. Why are private companies so afraid of a competition? When forced to compete maybe they will be able to squeeze some savings from places today they are not inclined. Health Care is a monopoly today. MOST states have no real choice. Insurance is being run in most states by only one or 2 big insurance companies who have no desire or incentive to reduce costs.

Having a big competition is always going to be a good thing. If the new competition is inefficient like the govt then insurance companies should be happy.

you cant have it both ways sir!

I like it only one way... my way. 

I will leave the Fox news reference aside 'cause there is no point commenting on it.

Too many supposed things that would happen. -- Obamacare is also nothing but supposition. How would you know it will work? There is no guarantee. You are supposing it will work. Same way, I am simply trying to visualize how the Govt option scenario play out. I am trying to visualize what will happen once govt plan kicks in.

First, how can Govt make their insurance cheaper? The govt plan will be competing with the private plan. -- Herein lies your biggest misconception and the biggest lie Obama is peddling. Let me explain why and how. What is the basic purpose of govt plan? Is it not to make health insurance so affordable for people that those who are uninsured can also get insured? So, who is uninsured? Is it the rich? Is it the middle class? Is it the upper-middle class? Who is uninsured? It is the poor and lower-middle class that is uninsured. So, if govt plan keeps their rates cheaper but close to what private insurance in selling, the targeted people will still not be able to buy it. The only way those people can buy govt insurance is if it is sold dirt cheap. Otherwise, you tell me... how will the uninsured afford the govt plan? So, the plan will be either dirt cheap or free. Add to that the fact that most businesses can escape from buying employer provided insurance by paying 2%-8% fine. So, suddenly a whole lot of people will be out of insurance. Where will they go? Private insurance will not be able to sell their insurance at the same rate as govt., so soon they will go out of business.

MOST states have no real choice. Insurance is being run in most states by only one or 2 big insurance companies who have no desire or incentive to reduce costs. -- Most states have few choices because they don't allow companies of one state to sell insurance in another state. It will need just one federal law to force states to allow out-of-state companies to sell insurance. Competition will lead to reduced prices. It is a common sense thing, Aunty. The same competition that you want to bring through govt plan, can come through a single federal law without govt plan. Common Sense.

Having a big competition is always going to be a good thing. If the new competition is inefficient like the govt then insurance companies should be happy. -- Agree that competition is good. So, if you realize that govt is going to be an inefficient competition, why are you hell bent on having that inefficient competition screw with the system?

[ruchir]

Health care is not a privilege. It should be a right in a first world country. If you think that is not the government's responsibility (To make affordable health care available ... and affordable to everyone ... not just rich people like you) then we have a fundamental difference. Its amost a  Ganguly - GC thing

You may want to ask Obama to amend the constitution to make health insurance a right. Currently it is not.

I think thats exactly what he is trying to do albeit via legislature .... unfortunately you republicans and Fox news wont let him. I am glad you are coming around though.

Fox News and Republicans are doing nothing. It's time you got this misconception out of your head. Republicans don't control congress.

I am not coming around anything. I don't want to live in a nation where govt provides everything to me, because in such a nation I won't own anything. If govt provides me food, clothes, house, car, medicine, work etc. then it is obvious that they will want control over every aspect of my life. Take money given to banks, for example. Obama gave money to banks and car companies, and now wants control over them. So, which country does the above scenario makes me think of? Hmmmm..... China? USSR? Hmmm..... Would I want to live in those countries? Probably not.

By the way, can you name any country in the world that has successfully provided food, clothes, house, vehicle, medicine, etc to it's citizens (and not gone bankrupt)?

Again, ER is kind of free in US. You go to ER and you will not be refused treatment. The question is about insurance. Healthcare can never be a fundamental right, simply because healthcare is not the most important necessity to stay alive. Use your logic. What is more important to stay alive? Food or medicine? Clothes or Medicine? A roof over head or medicine? What do poor people want more?

If you want to make something a fundamental right then which of these should you make first?

Yes, we do have a fundamental difference. In US, if you are poor, homeless, have no mode of transport, nothing to eat, tell me what will you do with free health insurance? When you are dying of hunger, what will you do with medicine?

I see. So since we are not giving them food or shelter the solution is not to fix that problem but to use that as an excuse to do even more horrible things to the poor.  I guess your premise is that we are a cruel nation who should not take care of its people. I respectfully disagree.

Aunty, aunty, aunty... my sweet aunty. Don't get upset and start saying things that you know I will never say and even you don't belive they are true.

I am saying again and again, fix the problem. Have health reforms. All I am saying is don't build a new system. The current system works fine for more than 85% americans. Fix the deficiencies so it works for 100% of americans.

For others, if they don't have health insurance, they go to ER. No one in US is refused from an ER.

and thats working so great isnt it. 

No it isn't. But that was not the point. The point was the even in a broken system, people still get free healthcare. What we need to do is make sure they have access to buy affordable insurance.

I think you are basically confusing between insurance problems and health care problems. Health care is available to everyone in US. No one is ever refused. The problem comes in insurance. In order to take care of insurance, we don't need to make it a fundamental right. We need to fix the way insurance industry works.

First HC is NOT available to everyone. Atleast not acceptable level of care. So lets get that straight.

And yes insurance industry needs to be fixed. We cant agree more. I think thats what Obama wants to do ... along with a few more things. The republicans wont let him do it. Please talk to them at the next meeting since we now agree on this point.

Disagree. Healthcare is available to EVERYONE in USA. Even to illegal aliens who don't deserve free healthcare.

Republicans could not do anything to Obamacare till MA elections because Dems had 60 votes. Get it in your system. And this out of your system that Republicans are stopping Obama. That was literally impossible. With supermajority in congress Obama and Dems did not need to pay attention to Republicans. I'm sure CNN or MSNBC or CBS or ABC were running stories on how many Dem senators Pelosi and Reid had to bribe to get their votes on Obamacare in the Senate. Even Dems had realized that Obamacare bills were damaged goods. 39 Dems voted against the House bill. They were broken, disastrous bills. Even Americans realized that and sent clear signals to Obama through NJ, VA and now MA elections. Now, Dems and Obama has got the signal loud and clear. Americans don't want Obamacare. They want the insurance industry reformed through targeted fixes that fix those areas that are broken.

By the way, before you make health insurance a fundamental right, think about making free food, free clothes, free house fundamental rights too. They are more important than free insurance. That's why I said, govt can not take care of everything for everyone. Life is tough.

No one said it all should be free. Reasonable access to all of them should be a fundamental right. So free food and clothes and shelter is already in place. It is called Social Security/Welfare/food stamps whatever. It exists today in your country. Now just need to address the health care stuff.

Social security is not free. Welfare is limited. Food stamps are limited. Obamacare is unlimited. That's the main problem!!!!

Again. Govt is not providing the sole insurance. We are talking of a Public OPTION. If govt runs so poorly, why do you think republicans are so scared of private companies competing with them?

They know that currently the rich (insurance, large hospitals and the AMA) are fleecing the general public. With a govt run competition, even that is run inefficiently, they would have to make cuts to stay competitive.

My biggest beef is not that the Obama plan is perfect. far from it. My beef is that the right just rejects things. Take the govt option and they should try to negotiate some safe guards about that getting subsidized overly to run the private insurers out of business. The republicans should make a level playing field. Unfortunately they want to act like gangulians and not allow the others to even take the field.

I explained above that if govt option come out, it will remove private insurance companies so quickly that before anyone realizes how bad govt plan is, the damage will be done. There will be no private health insurance.

And I think thats a major obfuscation (ha ha thanks Pitamah) of the facts purported by Fox News and the republicans. Thats a scare tactic being used to hammer the death nails into the Reform coffin.

Explain how what I have stated is false. Forget about Fox or Reps for a second. Just concentrate on what I'm saying.

If you think right refuses everything, what is left doing? Why is left refusing to even consider any Rep. idea? Clap is done by two hands, not one.

well if you mean those 9 pages are the ideas .... i guess we can have a fifth grader read those. Come now. There is nothing concrete or constructive that has come out of the right. They want a status quo since that makes their rich constituents happy.

Have you read those 9 pages? I'm sure you haven't    Just taking a guess. As I said, start with small things and gradually fix everything. Even Dems are saying this now. I have seen numerous TV interviews of Dem senators, governors, mayors who are now saying that it was a big mistake to fix everything at the same time, Obama should have fixed health insurance incrementally.

I posted the link to the right's plan. its effing NINE pages. if thats what the gop "thinks" about the complex topic, then we again have a disagreement.

What are some of the concrete ideas that they have brought up? Other than the tort reform (agree with it) or death panels.

Can you read, understand and comprehend those 9 pages? Now tell me, can you read, understand and comprehend the 2500 page House plan?

The idea is to start with something small and then build on it.

Again the biggest joke. We did not elect officials to go teach 5th graders. We have law makers who should be able to read more than 9 pages. Also should be able to come up with something substantial. A real reform.

Real reform does not happen if the politicians bite more than they can chew. Failure happens, as it has happened to Obama. Sometime 5th graders are actually smarter than you.

If something this complex can be covered in 9 pages then this no longer is an intellectual conversation and we should switch exclusively to discussing why Ganguly stole bread from little kids.

Yet another example of madness from left. Why do you want to tackle everything at the same time and fall flat on your face? Why can't you start tackling issues one at a time and do it successfully?

because then you will be blamed for not thinking everything through completely. Thats what Bush did and we saw how that worked out.

And look how Obamacare has worked out? Let me declare that Obamacare is now dead. If he and Dems continue to push for the same bill or similar bill, it will never go anywhere. If he does what many Dem politicians now want him to do - breaks it into pieces and tackle one piece at a time, then REAL reform will happen.

Come now. thats not explaining. Thats being a bill o'reilly

No, that plain old me.

so are you saying you are like Bill?

Do you know Obama and Hillary have said that Bill O'reilly had the most fair coverage of them during 2008 elections? I think you are living in a different world or you still have some old perception of him.

PS: Ganguly sucks

You betcha... 

now that last comment would make Palin proud

You betcha...