No more so then you blaming insurance companies and pharmaceutical ads. Let's demonize the big bad corporations and scream for the government to ride in and save us.

 

As I said, the problem is a combination of things. Some of those things have advocates on one side of the aisle; other things have advocates from the opposite side. Since nobody wants to work together and fix the problem — and they've had years to do it — one side and its lobbyists gets its feelings hurt.

 

The fact of the matter is the majority of the people in this country have insurance and are happy with how it works. They may not like the cost and I am sure something can be done about the cost but scraping what we have and what works for the majority to appease the minority is crazy. Especially when at least half of the minority either A) choose not to be insured or B) are here illegally.

 

Who chooses not to be insured? :confused:

Do they not have the right to advertise for their products? Should auto companies not be allowed to advertise so they can lower the price of their cars?

 

I agree with your point about them passing along their market losses.

 

I don't look at the health care industry and the auto industry the same way. I have a big issue with profiting off others' misfortune. So, no, they shouldn't be advertising, at least to the extreme inundation we're seeing now. Advertise it in trade magazines where the people who need to know about it will (doctors), rather than preying on the vanity and stupidity of the American public.

As I said, the problem is a combination of things. Some of those things have advocates on one side of the aisle; other things have advocates from the opposite side. Since nobody wants to work together and fix the problem — and they've had years to do it — one side and its lobbyists gets its feelings hurt.

 

 

 

Who chooses not to be insured? :confused:

 

http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.asp?a=top_lh&neid=200812091680.2_3f60002f68ea6edc

 

According to the United States Census Bureau in 2006, there were 45.7 million people in the U.S. (15.3 percent of the population) who were without health insurance. Another way of saying this is that 84.7% of the American people do have health insurance! (2)

 

Does this mean that 15.3% of the population can't afford health insurance or don't have access to healthcare? Based on the Census Bureau data almost 18 million of the uninsured make more than $50,000 per year and almost 10 million of them have an income of more than $75,000 per year!(3)

 

It may come as a surprise to many, but the Census Bureau data shows that the average uninsured person in the United State makes an above-average income. A great many young Americans who are financially well off and are not covered by their employer, voluntarily choose not to purchase health insurance.

 

The estimate is also that 9.5 million of the 45.7 million are illeagals. Which would drop the uninsured down to about 11%.

I don't look at the health care industry and the auto industry the same way. I have a big issue with profiting off others' misfortune. So, no, they shouldn't be advertising, at least to the extreme inundation we're seeing now. Advertise it in trade magazines where the people who need to know about it will (doctors), rather than preying on the vanity and stupidity of the American public.

So should insurance companies break even out of the goodness of their hearts? It's a business like anything else.

So should insurance companies break even out of the goodness of their hearts? It's a business like anything else.

 

Sorry, but I'm not shedding any tears for the poor, defenseless insurance companies. Why can't they find a happy medium rather than going out of their way to squeeze every last penny out of the American public as possible?

http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.asp?a=top_lh&neid=200812091680.2_3f60002f68ea6edc

 

 

 

The estimate is also that 9.5 million of the 45.7 million are illeagals. Which would drop the uninsured down to about 11%.

 

Forgive me if I have a hard time accepting numbers at face value from what is obviously a PR organ of the insurance lobby.

Health Ins companies and pharm companies arent the problems. Govt beaucracy and redtape along with frivolous lawsuits are the problems.

And that does nothing, but increase exponentially in the current version of the proposed bill.

Forgive me if I have a hard time accepting numbers at face value from what is obviously a PR organ of the insurance lobby.

 

The US Census Bureau is a PR organ for the insurance lobby?

I don't look at the health care industry and the auto industry the same way. I have a big issue with profiting off others' misfortune. So, no, they shouldn't be advertising, at least to the extreme inundation we're seeing now. Advertise it in trade magazines where the people who need to know about it will (doctors), rather than preying on the vanity and stupidity of the American public.

 

I agree. It makes very little sense from a health standpoint to advertise drugs directly to the consumers. It only makes sense from a profit standpoint (read: raises costs) and is only possible with doctor complicity. I read a study that argued when patients asked for a prescription drug by name doctors were significantly likely to prescribe it, even if they otherwise would not.

The US Census Bureau is a PR organ for the insurance lobby?

 

You beat me to that question.:madman:

The US Census Bureau is a PR organ for the insurance lobby?

 

Forgive me if I have a hard time accepting numbers analysis at face value from what is obviously a PR organ of the insurance lobby.

 

I amended my earlier post to add a word. I don't trust the Web site linked to not rig the numbers to make them say what suits them.

One conveniently ignored fact about the American health care system: People can't afford to pay their medical bills. Medical care should not be just for those who can afford to pay.

 

IMO, the best solution is to wipe out the health insurance industry, and make TV advertising by pharmaceutical companies illegal. It may not be a magic bullet, but those are the two biggest obstacles I see in this country as far as making health care more affordable.

 

That's the craziest idea I've ever heard in me life.......and it just might work.

I heard a stat but can not verify it. This morning on the Bradd and Britt show in Raleigh, NC - they stated that: Administration costs of Medicare was 3% of money spent. Administration costs of Medical Insurance Companies was 19%.

 

Their question was is this part of the differences in how high private insurance is and would some form of global medicare help to change that?

I heard a stat but can not verify it. This morning on the Bradd and Britt show in Raleigh, NC - they stated that: Administration costs of Medicare was 3% of money spent. Administration costs of Medical Insurance Companies was 19%.

 

Their question was is this part of the differences in how high private insurance is and would some form of global medicare help to change that?

 

Here's a fairly indepth article on that topic.

 

http://www.cahi.org/cahi_contents/resources/pdf/CAHI_Medicare_Admin_Final_Publication.pdf

 

Introduction

One of the most common, and least challenged, assertions in the debate over U.S. health care policy is that Medicare is much more efficient than the private sector. Critics of the private sector health insurance industry like to boast that Medicare administrative costs are about 2 percent of claims costs, while private insurance companies’ administrative costs are in the 20 to 25 percent range — or more.

 

That assertion is nearly always followed by a policy recommendation: Switch everyone to a government-financed health care system — or just put everyone in Medicare — and the country will save so much in administrative costs that it can cover all of the 46 million uninsured with no additional health care spending.

 

Sound too good to be true? It is.

 

Medicare’s Administrative Costs, Past and Present

It is very difficult to do a real apples-to-apples comparison of Medicare’s true costswith those of the insurance industry. The primary problem is that private sector insurers must track and divulge their administrative costs, while most of Medicare’s administrative costs are hidden or completely ignored by the complex and bureaucratic reporting and tracking systems used by the government.

http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.asp?a=top_lh&neid=200812091680.2_3f60002f68ea6edc

 

 

 

The estimate is also that 9.5 million of the 45.7 million are illeagals. Which would drop the uninsured down to about 11%.

 

What are you saying here cold??? They also say that the unemployment rate is at ten percent now. Couldn't another way that be said is that 90% of Americans have jobs or are working????